Sanders & Ogden v. Bacon
New York Supreme Court
IN error, from the court of common pleas of Saratoga county. The plaintiffs in error brought an action of assumpsit against the defendants in the court below. The declaration was in the usual form, on a promissory note under the statute.
Read the full summary
IN error, from the court of common pleas of Saratoga county. The plaintiffs in error brought an action of assumpsit against the defendants in the court below. The declaration was in the usual form, on a promissory note under the statute. At the trial of the cause, the plaintiffs eave in evidence a note, signed bv the defendants, as ° ° ’ follows : “ For value received, we, jointly and severally, _ , \ -r ^ , promise to pay Barent Sanders and Isaac Ogden, or order, the sum of 90 dollars and 71 cents, with interest, on or before the 15th of September next. Witness our hands this 4th day of…
1Per curiam
The note was well declared upon, as á promissory note within the statute. It had all the requisites of such a ndte. The endorsement upon the back of it was no part of the note, and the effect of it was only to show the consideration, and to operate as a notice to any person who might purchase the note. If the plaintiffs were bound to have shown, in the first instance, the performance of that consideration, the objection ought to have been raised at the trial. The decision, turned upon another point, and the intendment from the record would be, that the consideration was admitted, aá no…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Costelo v. CrowellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
- Kirk v. Dodge County Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875
- Barnard v. CushingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1842
- Knox v. Reeside, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1836
- Foster v. HillSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1858
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.