Drew v. Towle
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, to recover the amount of three several promissory notes of the defendant, to wit, 1st, one note for $200, dated Nov. 30, 1847, signed by the defendant, and payable to the plaintiff in one year, with interest.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, to recover the amount of three several promissory notes of the defendant, to wit, 1st, one note for $200, dated Nov. 30, 1847, signed by the defendant, and payable to the plaintiff in one year, with interest. On this note was indorsed as follows: 1848, May 27, received interest till the 1st day of April next. 1849, January 10, received §175. 2. One note for §200, dated Nov. 30, 1847, signed by the defendant, and payable to the plaintiff, in two years, with interest. On this note was indorsed as follows: — ■ 111848, May 27, received interest till the first day of April next.” 3. One…
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
Upon the question of failure of consideration as a defence to a promissory note, the rule generally adopted elsewhere is well laid down in Bayley on Bills 393. “ A total failure of consideration is where it can be insisted on as a total bar; inadequacy or a partial failure, a bar pro tanto only. If a bill or note is given, either wholly or as to a specific part, as the consideration of a special contract, and that contract either fails in toto, or is in toto rescinded, it will be an answer to an action on the bill or note, either wholly or pro tanto, if the plaintiff stands in a position…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Loomis v. BedelSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1840
- Parker v. BrownSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1844
- Haseltine v. GuildSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1840
- Reed v. PrentissSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1818
- Wadleigh v. PillsburySuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1843
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Stanley v. ClarkDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 1957
- Brown v. BrownSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1874