Russell v. Whipple
New York Supreme Court
Assumpsit on note, by payee against maker. The plain* tiff Averred that the defendant made his certain note, in writing, in the words and figures following, to wit: “Due Lanson Russell, or bearer, one day from date, two hundred dollars, twenty-six cents, for value received: as witness my ‘ ' • J ' J hand, this sixth day of January, in the year of our Lord 1823.” By means whereof, &c., but did not aver that this note had been delivered.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit on note, by payee against maker. The plain* tiff Averred that the defendant made his certain note, in writing, in the words and figures following, to wit: “Due Lanson Russell, or bearer, one day from date, two hundred dollars, twenty-six cents, for value received: as witness my ‘ ' • J ' J hand, this sixth day of January, in the year of our Lord 1823.” By means whereof, &c., but did not aver that this note had been delivered. Special demurrer and joinder, assigning the following causes; 1. That this was not a promissory note within the statute, (1 R. L. 151,) though declared on as…
1Opinion of the Court
The demurrer was noticed as frivolous, and being accordingly brought on out of its place on the calendar, the Court *537thought it too plain for argument in its regular order, and ° , rendered .
Judgment for the plaintiff.
2Cited by13 opinions
- Henry Miller, in Error v. David Austen, William S. Wilmerding, and David Austen, Jr.Supreme Court of the United States · 1852
- Hook v. WhiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Sackett v. SpencerNew York Supreme Court · 1859
- Sheldon v. HeatonNew York Supreme Court · 1895
- Currier v. LockwoodSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1873
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.