Taylor v. Corbiere
New York Supreme Court
The action was brought upon a prommissory note made by the defendant, payable to the order of E. J. Sherman, and by him endorsed to the plaintiff. The complaint alleged that the note “ was duly endorsed by the payee, and transferred to the plaintiff, for a good and valuable consideration, and that the defendant had not paid the same, but was justly indebted to the plaintiff therefor.”
Read the full summary
The action was brought upon a prommissory note made by the defendant, payable to the order of E. J. Sherman, and by him endorsed to the plaintiff. The complaint alleged that the note “ was duly endorsed by the payee, and transferred to the plaintiff, for a good and valuable consideration, and that the defendant had not paid the same, but was justly indebted to the plaintiff therefor.” The defendant demurred to the complaint, on the ground that it did not state a sufficient cause of action. The plaintiff, upon a notice of five days, applied for judgment, alleging that the demurrer was…
1Opinion of the Court
Harris, Justice.
A preliminary question has been- raised by the defendant upon the sufficiency of the notice. It was-served on Wednesday for the following Monday. Relying upon Whipple agt. Williams, (4 Howard, 28,) the defendant’s counsel insisted, that Sunday should be excluded in the computation of time, and, if so, that the notice of the application would be short, it leaving but four days. The 407th section of the Code has prescribed the mode of computing time in every case, where, under the provisions of that "act, any act is to be done within a limited time. In estimating such time, the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Columbia Turnpike Road v. HaywoodNew York Supreme Court · 1833
3Cited by5 opinions
- Aultman Taylor Co. v. . SymeNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Van Laer v. Kansas Triphammer Brick WorksSupreme Court of Kansas · 1896
- Cortland Savings Bank v. LighthallNew York Supreme Court · 1907
- Dart v. Van HornNew York Supreme Court · 1909
- Cortland Savings Bank v. LighthallNew York Supreme Court · 1907