Legal Opinion

Fales v. Wadsworth

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided May 15, 1844PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Assumpsit upon a promissory note, dated Jan. 1, 1841, for ^414,13, signed by Butterfield & Barker, and payable to the defendant, by whom it was indorsed, in ninety days and grace, at either of the banks in Portland. To sustain his action the plaintiff offered in evidence the protest by Henry Ilsley, jr. a notary public for the County of Cumberland in this State, dated April 3, 1841, before the Rev. Stat. went into effect as laws.

Read the full summary

Assumpsit upon a promissory note, dated Jan. 1, 1841, for ^414,13, signed by Butterfield & Barker, and payable to the defendant, by whom it was indorsed, in ninety days and grace, at either of the banks in Portland. To sustain his action the plaintiff offered in evidence the protest by Henry Ilsley, jr. a notary public for the County of Cumberland in this State, dated April 3, 1841, before the Rev. Stat. went into effect as laws. The counsel for the defendant objected to the introduction of this paper, and contended, that it was not legal evidence to prove demand or notice. It was admitted.…

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was by

Whitman C. J.

The note of hand, declared upon in this case, was made payable at either of the banks in Portland. When at maturity, on the last day of grace, it is stated in the protest of Henry Ilsley, jr. notary public, that he demanded payment of the same at the Canal Bank, which is a bank established in Portland, and was answered by the cashier, that there were no funds there for the purpose. The notary further states, that, afterwards, on the same day, he sent a written notice of the dishonor^ by mail, to the defendant at Hiram, Me. By the Revised statutes,…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Judd v. JuddMichigan Supreme Court · 1900
  2. Rich v. FlandersSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1859
  3. Sanders v. GreenstreetSupreme Court of Kansas · 1880
  4. Burbank v. People ex rel. RumseyIllinois Supreme Court · 1878
  5. Robert E. Dupuis v. Roman Catholic Bishop of PortlandSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API