President, Directors of Granite Bank v. Richardson
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Assumpsit on this promissory note, signed by the defendant. “September 14th 1840. Six months from date, for value received, I promise to pay the President, Directors and Company of the Granite Bank, or order, at said bank, the sum of $300, having lodged, as collateral, four shares Phcenix Bank, Charlestown.”
Read the full summary
Assumpsit on this promissory note, signed by the defendant. “September 14th 1840. Six months from date, for value received, I promise to pay the President, Directors and Company of the Granite Bank, or order, at said bank, the sum of $300, having lodged, as collateral, four shares Phcenix Bank, Charlestown.” At the trial in the court of common pleas, the defendant introduced a letter from the plaintiffs’ cashier, in these words • “ Granite Bank, September 15th 1841. Mr. A. L. Richardson : Sir: Your note for $300, which fell due at this bank on the 14 (17) March last, still remains unpaid.…
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, C. J.
On this case, the court are of opinion that the instruction of the court of common pleas was right. The bank shares were taken as collateral security for the payment of the note. It afforded the holders an additional remedy, but did not supersede their remedy by action. If they had a right to sell the shares when the note became due, they were not bound to do so. If they had been actually sold, and the value redized in cash, it might have operated as payment de facto ; but not till *409then. Rice v. Catlin, 14 Pick. 221. Middlesex Bank v. Minot, 4 Met. 325.
A very different rule may apply where…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Fairbairn v. MeansCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1863
3Cited by2 opinions
- Rubin v. SalomonCity of New York Municipal Court · 1930
- Lewis v. Hecker, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1934