Bixby v. Whitney
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Assumpsit on a prqmissory note1 made by the defendant to the-plaintiff, in her capacity of executrix, bearing date May 21, 1823, -and payable in boards on or before Avgust 1, 1824. At the trial, before the Chief Justice, at the sittings after this term, the defendant contended that the note was merged in a submission of .all demands between the parties to certain arbitrators, and .their award thereon.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit on a prqmissory note1 made by the defendant to the-plaintiff, in her capacity of executrix, bearing date May 21, 1823, -and payable in boards on or before Avgust 1, 1824. At the trial, before the Chief Justice, at the sittings after this term, the defendant contended that the note was merged in a submission of .all demands between the parties to certain arbitrators, and .their award thereon. To prove which he produced the arbitration bond, dated May 21, 1823, and conditioned to perform the award, in the usual form; reciting the submission, which was of “ all debts, dues and demands…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was read at the ensuirig October term in Kennebec, as drawn up by
MecubN C. J.
In this case a motion in arrest of judgment has been filed, and an exception alleged against the decision of the judge who presided at the trial. As to the motion: — The first, third and fourth reasons assigned in support of it, state omissions on the part of the plaintiff of certain particulars which it is contended she was bound to perform and aver. But it seems well settled that where no place is appointed for the delivery of specific articles, the obligor must go before the day of payment…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Stemmer v. Scottish InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1898
- Ebert v. ArendsIllinois Supreme Court · 1901
- of Lee v. Administratrix of DolanNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1884