Duel v. Spence
New York Court of Appeals
Duel sued Spence iu the New York superior court, as an indorser of two promissory notes, made by the firm of Sweet & Tibbs, payable at a bank in Newburgh, and which Spence, the defendant, had indorsed for accommodation of Sweet & Tibbs, the makers. ' The makers, failing to procure a discount at the bank, transferred the notes to the firm of Buckley & Duel (of which plaintiff was a member) to pay a check drawn by Sweet & Tibbs which Buckley & Duel held.
Read the full summary
Duel sued Spence iu the New York superior court, as an indorser of two promissory notes, made by the firm of Sweet & Tibbs, payable at a bank in Newburgh, and which Spence, the defendant, had indorsed for accommodation of Sweet & Tibbs, the makers. ' The makers, failing to procure a discount at the bank, transferred the notes to the firm of Buckley & Duel (of which plaintiff was a member) to pay a check drawn by Sweet & Tibbs which Buckley & Duel held. The defense was that the notes were indorsed without consideration, to enable the makers to obtain a loan by discounting them at the banks…
1Opinion of the CourtRuggles, J.
On the trial of this cause the defendants’ counsel requested the judge to charge that if Spence was an accommodation indorser, and the notes were made for the purpose of having one or both of them discounted at one or both of the Newburgh banks, then the notes were diverted from *560their original purpose, and that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover.
The judge was right in refusing to charge according to this request. According to the testimony of Sweet, the notes were drawn to enable Sweet & Tibbs to raise money, and there is ■ nothing in the case to show that the money, when raised, was…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Powell v. WatersNew York Supreme Court · 1819
- Brown v. TaberNew York Supreme Court · 1830
3Cited by2 opinions
- Tinsdale v. MurrayNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1881
- Katz v. KuhnNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1880