Hubbell & Curran v. Ames & May
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of assumpsit on a promissory note,dated 6th January, 1832, and payable 1st June, 1832, given by the defendants to John Simplot or bearer. The plaintiffs declared as the holders of the note by transfer.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit on a promissory note,dated 6th January, 1832, and payable 1st June, 1832, given by the defendants to John Simplot or bearer. The plaintiffs declared as the holders of the note by transfer. The defehdants pleaded the general issue, and on the trial of the cause proved that the note at the making thereof belonged to Henry Simplot, it being given and made payable to JohnSimplot as the agent of Henry Simplot, and that it was transferred by Henry Simplot to the plaintiffs on the 23d April, 1832 ; that previous to the transfer, proceedings were commenced before a…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Nelson, J.
The evidence of the proceedings against Simplot, as an absconding or concealed debtor, was admissible under the general issue. Clark v. Yale, 12 Wendell, 470, and Comstock v. Hoag, 5 id. 600.
As to the proof of the preliminary proceedings: the report of the commissioner is declared by statute conclusive evidence that the proceedings stated therein were ha<l; and the appointment of trustees is also declared conclusive evidence (except in the case of reference provided for by the statute,) that the debtor therein named was a concealed, absconding or nonresident debtor,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Clark v. YaleNew York Supreme Court · 1834