Sutherland v. Mead
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal from Special Term, New York county. Action by George R. Sutherland against Charles H. Mead and Thomas Taft, impleaded. From an order denying a motion to vacate and set aside the judgment, or, in the alternative, to modify it by reducing it to $150, with interest, defendants Mead and Taft appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtHatch, J.
This action was brought to recover upon a promissory note made by the defendant Deshong, upon which the appellants were accommodation indorsers. It appeared upon the hearing of the motion that the defendant Palleske was indebted to the appellants upon a promissory note for the sum of $1,000; that as such note was about falling due, and on the 15th day of April, 1902, Palleske requested the appellants to accept in payment of such note the promissory note executed by Deshong, set forth in the complaint in the action; that they refused so to accept the same unless Palleske could procure it to be…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Metropolitan National Bank of New York v. LoydNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Comstock v. . HierNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Payne v. . BurnhamNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Mumford v. NicollCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1822
- Mayer v. . HeidelbachNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Birket v. ElwardSupreme Court of Kansas · 1904
- Felt v. BushUtah Supreme Court · 1912
- In re Hopper-Morgan Co.District Court, N.D. New York · 1907
- Bank of America v. WaydellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
- Macaulay v. HolstenNew York Supreme Court · 1909
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.