Ireland v. Kip
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit brought against the’defendant as endorsor of a promissory note, dated the 2SJ April, 1811, made by Samuel Kip for (£00 dollars, payable to the defendant ov order, thirty days after date. The cause was tried at the Nem-Torh sittings, in November last, before Mr. Justice Spencer.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit brought against the’defendant as endorsor of a promissory note, dated the 2SJ April, 1811, made by Samuel Kip for (£00 dollars, payable to the defendant ov order, thirty days after date. The cause was tried at the Nem-Torh sittings, in November last, before Mr. Justice Spencer. To ^ prove a nonce to tus deiendam. ol the non-payment of the note, the plaintiff called the clerk of a notary, who stated that on the 25th May last, he called several times at the store of the maker of the note, to demand payment, but found it shut up, and no person there to pay the…
1Per curiam
Putting the notice in the postoffice in the city of New-York was not sufficient in this case. There was no post-office at Kipss Bay, where the defendant resided, and the penny-post or letter-carrier does not deliver letters at that distance. The holder of the note was bound to give personal notice, or to see that the notice reached the dwelling-house of the defendant, the place of whose residence must have been known to him.
We are of opinion that a new trial ought to be awarded with costs to abide fop event of the suit.
New trial granted.
END OCTOBER TERM.
2Cited by16 opinions
- Seneca County Bank v. NeassNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- President of the Bank of the United States v. CorcoranSupreme Court of the United States · 1829
- Stanton v. KlineNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Van Vechten v. . PruynNew York Court of Appeals · 1856
- Bank of Columbia v. LawrenceU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia · 1824
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.