Eld v. Gorham
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action on a promissory note, made by the defendant, payable to the order of W. M. B. Gorham, and by him indorsed to the plaintiff. The cause was tried, on the general issue, at New-Haven, January term, 1849. The defence set up by the defendant, was, that the note was altered and made negotiable, after it was signed by the defendant, without his consent or knowledge.
Read the full summary
This was an action on a promissory note, made by the defendant, payable to the order of W. M. B. Gorham, and by him indorsed to the plaintiff. The cause was tried, on the general issue, at New-Haven, January term, 1849. The defence set up by the defendant, was, that the note was altered and made negotiable, after it was signed by the defendant, without his consent or knowledge. To establish this defence, the defendant offered himself as a witness; to which the plaintiff objected. It was admitted, that the General Assembly of this state adjourned sine die, on the 28th day of June, 1848, at 12…
1Opinion of the CourtStorrs, J.
The question first presented in this case, is, whether the volume termed “ The Revised Statutes of the State of Connecticut,” published during the present year, under the superintendence of the committee of revision, appointed by the General Assembly for that purpose in 1847, is to be deemed to contain all the public statute laws which were in force in this state, when the present action was tried. If this question is resolved in the affirmative, it is conceded, that the court below erred in excluding the defendant as a witness; since by the 141st section of the act contained in those…
2Cited by30 opinions
- State v. JamesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Evans v. BrowneIndiana Supreme Court · 1869
- Division of Howard CountySupreme Court of Kansas · 1875
- State ex rel. Reed v. JonesWashington Supreme Court · 1893
- Leete v. Griswold PostSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.