Benton v. Willard
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit. The plaintiff declared as indorsee of a promissory note made by one William Hayden, payable to the defendant, and by him indorsed to the plaintiff, with counts for money had and received, and money paid. The plaintiff produced the note described, with the defendant’s name indorsed in blank on the back, where also appeared the name of the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. The plaintiff declared as indorsee of a promissory note made by one William Hayden, payable to the defendant, and by him indorsed to the plaintiff, with counts for money had and received, and money paid. The plaintiff produced the note described, with the defendant’s name indorsed in blank on the back, where also appeared the name of the plaintiff. The plaintiff also produced the protest of a notary public, duly executed, showing demand and notice according to the law of Connecticut, where the note was made, and where the plaintiff and maker lived, with the deposition of the notary…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
The note in this case was made in Connecticut, and if necessary the construction of the contract must be determined by the laws of that State. It appears to have been held there that a blank. indorsement of a negotiable note, by a third pei’son, is only prima facie evidence of the contract which it imports; and that it is competent, as between the parties to the indorsement, to *595prove by parol evidence the agreement which was in fact made at the time of the indorsement. 11 Conn. 213, Pierce v. Cailin. Such evidence is not exceptionable, it is said, either as contravening the legal import of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Moies v. BirdMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Perkins v. CatlinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1836
- Hodgkins v. BondSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1818
- Martin v. BoydSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1840