Purdy v. . Vermilya
New York Court of Appeals
This was an action of assumpsit brought by the plaintiff as holder of a bill of exchange, drawn by C. Snowden to his own order upon the defendant, and accepted by him for |700, payable with interest three years from August 30, 1844. It was commenced by a declaration containing the common money counts, annexed to which was a notice under Chapter 276 of the Laws of 1832, that “ the following is a copy of the bill of exchange upon which this action is brought, and which will be…
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit brought by the plaintiff as holder of a bill of exchange, drawn by C. Snowden to his own order upon the defendant, and accepted by him for |700, payable with interest three years from August 30, 1844. It was commenced by a declaration containing the common money counts, annexed to which was a notice under Chapter 276 of the Laws of 1832, that “ the following is a copy of the bill of exchange upon which this action is brought, and which will be given in evidence under the money counts contained in the within declaration, and is the cause of action on which the…
1Opinion of the CourtMorse, J.
The objection taken at the trial was not put upon the ground that the bill could not be given in evidence on the money counts at common law, but upon the ground that a copy of the endorsement by the payee was not served with the declaration. The objection, as appears from the bill of exceptions, was “ on the ground that evidence of the bill having been endorsed was not admissible under the said declaration and notice.” As the suit was evidently intended to be commenced under the “ Act regulating suits on bills of exchange and promissory notes,” passed April 25, 1832, and the acts amending the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Pierce v. CraftsNew York Supreme Court · 1815
3Cited by2 opinions
- People ex rel. Central Pacific Railroad v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Purdy v. VermilyaNew York Court of Appeals · 1853