Bank of Columbia v. Lawrence
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia
At law. Assumpsit [by the Bank of Columbia] against the indorser [Lawrence] of Joseph Milligan’s promissory note for 85.000, at sixty days, negotiable in the bank of Columbia, payable on the 13th-16th of April, 1819, and dated at Georgetown.
Read the full summary
At law. Assumpsit [by the Bank of Columbia] against the indorser [Lawrence] of Joseph Milligan’s promissory note for 85.000, at sixty days, negotiable in the bank of Columbia, payable on the 13th-16th of April, 1819, and dated at Georgetown. By the bill of exceptions in this case, it appears that evidence was offered, that the defendant, who was a morocco leather-dresser, and owned a house in the city of Washington, where he had his shop, removed, in the year 1818, into the country, in the county of Alexandria, where he lived, at the time of indorsing the note, and when it became payable, and…
1Opinion of the Court 1
January 12, 1825,
2Opinion of the Court · CranchCranch, Chief Judge
(THRUS-TON, Circuit Judge, dissenting.)
The first question is, would the notice, left at. the post-office in Georgetown, if it had been left in due time, and if the defendant had not had a place of business or counting-house in Washington, have been sufficient? Upon this point we are referred to the case of the Bank of U. S. v. Norwood, in 1 Har. *640& J. 423, a case which I have not seen lately, hut which I believe decided that notice, (to an indorser living in the vicinity of Baltimore, and to whom the post-office at Baltimore was the nearest post-office,) put into the…
3Cases cited4 opinions
- Freeman v. BoyntonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1811
- Ireland v. KipNew York Supreme Court · 1814
- Ireland v. KipNew York Supreme Court · 1813
- Bank of the United States v. NorwoodU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maryland · 1803