Southwick v. Sax
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of assumpsit, tried at the Rensselaer circuit in June, 1829, before the Hon. William A. Duer, then one of the circuit judges.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, tried at the Rensselaer circuit in June, 1829, before the Hon. William A. Duer, then one of the circuit judges. The plaintiffs proved demands to the amount of $1394,35, The defendant, on his part, proved that about the 15th October, 1826, he gave one of the plaintiffs an order on J. R. Van Rensselaer for $1143,84, being the amount of a quantity of logs sold by him to Van Rensselaer, telling him that the logs were to be paid for at farthest by the 1st of November then next. The order was presented by the plaintiffs to Van Rensselaer, who declined accepting it…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Sutherland, J.
The order in question, if negotiable, was in effect a bill of exchange, drawn by the defendant upon V an Rensselaer at sight, in favor of the plaintiff. 1 Wendell, 522, and cases there cited. But whether it was a bill of exchange or not, the plaintiffs had no right to extend the time of payment by an arrangement which bound the defendant, and might operate injuriously upon his rights. The order upon Van Rensselaer was absolute f >va sp^ific liquidated sum, poy ■.... o ,-.. ...oj7 do but to present it, and if payment was refused, to return it to the defendant, and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Reynolds v. WardNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Leonard v. MasonNew York Supreme Court · 1828
3Cited by7 opinions
- Stevens v. WileyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
- Elm City Lumber Co. v. MacKenzieSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1904
- Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Wisconsin, Iowa & Nebraska Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1889
- Munson v. MageeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
- Griggs v. DayThe Superior Court of New York City · 1890
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.