President of the Bank of Utica v. De Mott
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of ass.umpsit against the defendant as endorser of a promissory note. , Thé cause was tried at the ^ast Oneida'ctecmh.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of ass.umpsit against the defendant as endorser of a promissory note. , Thé cause was tried at the ^ast Oneida'ctecmh. The note on which-the. action was founded was drawn by.one William Low for 375 dollars,- and payable to the defendant or order, at the Bank ot Utica, one hundred and twenty days’ after ■» , ■ T •. . - ' ^ date, and was dated .the 6tn Dec. 1814. There was no town or f’lace mentioned in the note where it purported to have been inastated that he inquired of'the, cashier and some of t-he.directors, as to the place of residence of the defendant, and that/ he was…
1Opinion of the CourtSpencer, J.
The defendant is sued as endorser of a promissory note, payable at the bank of Utica. When the note .fell due, notice of its non-payment was given, by a letter put into the post-office at Utica, directed to the defendant, at Canandaiqua. It was proved that the defendant lived at Ovid, in the county of Seneca, and had resided there for ten years past. The excuse for the misdirection of the notice is, that the book-keeper who gave it, was informed, by the cashier and some of the directors of the bank, that the defendant resided at Canandaiqua.
The notice is bad. The defendant was entitled to…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Lawrence v. . MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
- Hartford Bank v. GreenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1861
- Ferris v. SaxtonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1818