Legal Opinion

Payne v. Eden

New York Supreme Court

Decided August 15, 1805PublishedCited by 12 opinions

ASSUMPSIT by the holder of a promissory note, made and indorsed under the following circumstances,. The defendant being about to take the benefit of the il act, for giving relief in cases of insolvency,”* applied ■to John H. Hurtin, one of his creditors, to sign his petition. This he agreed to do, on receiving, for the amount of his debt, a note payable 60 days after date, leaving a blank for the date, to be inserted after the discharge was obtained.

Read the full summary

ASSUMPSIT by the holder of a promissory note, made and indorsed under the following circumstances,. The defendant being about to take the benefit of the il act, for giving relief in cases of insolvency,”* applied ■to John H. Hurtin, one of his creditors, to sign his petition. This he agreed to do, on receiving, for the amount of his debt, a note payable 60 days after date, leaving a blank for the date, to be inserted after the discharge was obtained. In consequence of this, Eden signed the note on which the present suit was brought, and Hurtin without annexing any affidavit of his debt, put…

1Opinion of the Court

Per-curiam, Delivered by

Thom?son, J.

This action, I think cannot he sustained. The consideration for which the note • in question was given, undoubtedly Was, that the payee should become, under the insolvent act,. a petitioning creditor, for the maker, though for a debt' bona jide due. Why the defendant, under -the circumstances stated in the case, should be induced to give the note, is not easily discernible. He had a competent number of petitioning creditors, without Hurtin, But, whatever the reason might have been, the, inducement for giving the note, according to the facts stated in the…

2Cited by12 opinions

  1. Gray v. . HookNew York Court of Appeals · 1851
  2. Ward v. Van BokkelenNew York Court of Chancery · 1828
  3. Mauran v. LambNew York Supreme Court · 1827
  4. The Ann C. PrattUnited States Circuit Court · 1853
  5. Tinker v. HurstMichigan Supreme Court · 1888

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API