Stitt v. Garrett
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court for the City and County of Philadelphia. John Garrett, brought an action on the case, against John W. Stitt, and George Wall, trading under the firm of John W. Stitt & Co., and filed a declaration in assumpsit upon a bill .of exchange, dated the 2d of January 1837, drawn by E. E. Haskell upon J. W. Stitt & Co., and accepted by them,.for $750, in favour of E. E. Haskell, and endorsed by him to the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court for the City and County of Philadelphia. John Garrett, brought an action on the case, against John W. Stitt, and George Wall, trading under the firm of John W. Stitt & Co., and filed a declaration in assumpsit upon a bill .of exchange, dated the 2d of January 1837, drawn by E. E. Haskell upon J. W. Stitt & Co., and accepted by them,.for $750, in favour of E. E. Haskell, and endorsed by him to the plaintiff. The plaintiff filed a copy of this instrument of writing, in conformity with the provisions of the act of 28th March, 1835. The defendant filed the following…
1Per curiam
One of the defendants swears to what would certainly be a defence against the original holder; but it is necessary to put the endorsee in the same predicament, and to that end it is sworn that the plaintiff received the bill, not in the usual course, but under circumstances of suspicion which ought to-have put him on inquiry. But the conclusion thus indicated is matter to be verified, not by the oath of the party, but by the judgment of the Court: it is in fine a conclusion of law. The only pure matter of fact sworn to, is, that the plaintiff took the draft under circumstances which do not…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- West v. SimmonsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1837
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hutchinson v. Boggs & KirkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1857
- Lawyers' Title Insurance & Trust Co. v. JonesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1906