Belden v. Devoe
New York Supreme Court
Devoe, one of the defendants in this cause, pleaded that a portion of the plaintiff’s causes of action consisted of a promissory note, which belonged to a banking corporation in the city of New-York. who casually lost the note, which came to the han’ds of the plaintiff without any consideration given by him to the bank; and that he, therefore, was not legally entitled to maintain an action thereon.
Read the full summary
Devoe, one of the defendants in this cause, pleaded that a portion of the plaintiff’s causes of action consisted of a promissory note, which belonged to a banking corporation in the city of New-York. who casually lost the note, which came to the han’ds of the plaintiff without any consideration given by him to the bank; and that he, therefore, was not legally entitled to maintain an action thereon. He also pleaded (in another plea) that the same note was wrongfully obtained from one John Moon, one of the defendants in this cause, and the second endorser of the note; and that the same came to…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Savage, Ch. .1.
The delay of the plaintiff in making this motion is no answer to the application. The defendant having interposed pleas that are false, has no right to complain of any expense to which he has been subjected in consequence of the omission of the plaintiff to make this motion at an early day. The objections to the authentication of the affidavit cannot be supported ; the statute has been substantially complied with.* As to the decision in Brown v. *226Bissell, it is an authority for a case similar to it, but cannot be admitted as establishing the general principle that…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Darrow v. MillerNew York Supreme Court · 1850
- Ginnel v. StaynerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1902
- Manufacturers & Mechanics' Bank of the Northern Liberties in the Co. v. CowdenNew York Supreme Court · 1842