Gregory & Bain v. Burrall & Hoffman
New York Supreme Court
A verdict was taken in this cause at the Albany circuit in August, 1828, for the plaintiffs, for the sum of $601,79, subject to the opinion of this court on the following facts : In October, 1825, Keeler and Mather, a mercantile firm in Albany, drew a bill of exchange on Keeler and Rogers, a firm in New-York, for $1500, payable in 60 days, procured the endorsement of Gregory and Bain, the present plaintiffs, who endorsed for the accommodation of the drawers and drawees, and…
Read the full summary
A verdict was taken in this cause at the Albany circuit in August, 1828, for the plaintiffs, for the sum of $601,79, subject to the opinion of this court on the following facts : In October, 1825, Keeler and Mather, a mercantile firm in Albany, drew a bill of exchange on Keeler and Rogers, a firm in New-York, for $1500, payable in 60 days, procured the endorsement of Gregory and Bain, the present plaintiffs, who endorsed for the accommodation of the drawers and drawees, and transmitted the same to Keeler and Rogers to raise money upon it for the use of the drawers and drawees, who were…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Marcy, J.
The question presented by this case is, whether the plaintiffs can recover the excess received of Leavitt by the defendants over the $1000 advanced by them to James Keeler on the bill of exchange, which was deposited as security for that advance 1 That the defendants hold this excess without any right to retain it, cannot be, and indeed is not, contested; but it is contended that the plaintiffs in this cause have not the right to receive it. If they have a right to recover, it is not on the bill as parties to it; as payees and first endorsers, they must look for their in*393…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Hartfield v. RoperNew York Supreme Court · 1839
- Cleghon v. Barstow Irrigation Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1906