Shaver v. Ehle
New York Supreme Court
IN ERROR, on certiorari tó a Justice’s Court. The defendant in error, brought an action in the Court below, against the plaintiff in error, upon a promissory note, payable to Holmes, or bearer, executed by the plaintiff in error, to which there was a subscribing witness.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR, on certiorari tó a Justice’s Court. The defendant in error, brought an action in the Court below, against the plaintiff in error, upon a promissory note, payable to Holmes, or bearer, executed by the plaintiff in error, to which there was a subscribing witness. At the . ° triaJ, the subscribing witness was not produced, but the i • i it r 7 , 7 plaintiff below proved by one luoucks, who had formerly owned the note, that while he owned it, the witness applied to the defendant for payment, but did not show him the note, nor did he state the amount or date of it, but the defendant…
1Per curiam
According to the decision of this Court in ° the case of Herrick v. Whitney, (15 Johns. Rep. 240.) *202Louclcs was an incompetent witness to prove the making of the note. Although he sold it upon condition that it was to be collected at the risk of the plaintiff below, that means the risk of the defendant’s solvency, not the risk of the note being a forgery. But independent of this objection, the evidence was not sufficient to warrant a recovery. The witness spoke to the defendant about a note which the defendant had given to Holmes, or bearer, without mentioning date or sum, and the defendant…
2Cited by25 opinions
- Murray v. JudahNew York Supreme Court · 1826
- People v. . CoreyNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Matter of PirieNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
- Challiss v. McCrumSupreme Court of Kansas · 1879
- Alleman v. WheelerIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.