Brower v. Jones
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit. The first count was on a bill of exchange ; the second was for money had and received to the use of the plaintiff. The cause was tried at the Dutchess circuit, before Mr. Justice Thompson, on thé 21st September, 1807. The plaintiff produced and proved the following bill or order : IN CHANCERY, Smith W. Jones J v. >- Statement. Thomas Thorn.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit. The first count was on a bill of exchange ; the second was for money had and received to the use of the plaintiff. The cause was tried at the Dutchess circuit, before Mr. Justice Thompson, on thé 21st September, 1807. The plaintiff produced and proved the following bill or order : IN CHANCERY, Smith W. Jones J v. >- Statement. Thomas Thorn. J April 9th, 1800. ■ Balance due this day, after the payment of 235 dollars to Peter Mesier, jun. _£l29 7 9 Interest to the 9th December, 1804, 42 5 1 £171 12 10 Sir, Please to pay to William Brower, or order, the amount…
1Opinion of the CourtVan Ness, J.
Admitting that an action can be maintained on the order stated in this case, I think that upon the facts now before us, the plaintiff ought not to recover.
If the order had been drawn to secure the payment of a pre-existing debt due from the defendant to the plaintiff, and that fact had been satisfactorily and clearly proved, the plaintiff’s case would have been much stronger. There is some reason to believe that such is the fact, but the evidence leaves it doubtful whether the plaintiff’s demand had not been extinguished by the assignment of the mortgage against Thorne.
Cornelius W. Brown and…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Starr Bros. v. StevensonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1894
- Jackson ex dem. Teed v. HalsteadNew York Supreme Court · 1825
- Murfey v. BraceNew York Supreme Court · 1857
- Cochran v. WheelerSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1834
- Snyder v. FindleySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1791
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.