Howard v. Duncan
New York Supreme Court
Motion upon a case and exceptions for a new trial, heard in the first instance at General Term. The plaintiffs sued as indorsee of a note running in the name of the defendants as joint makers, and given by Spencer Duncan, the defendant, to one Starring, on the purchase of a horse, as the consideration therefor, and payable to Starring’s order. The defendant, Smith Duncan, defended and averred that his name had been forged to the note.
Read the full summary
Motion upon a case and exceptions for a new trial, heard in the first instance at General Term. The plaintiffs sued as indorsee of a note running in the name of the defendants as joint makers, and given by Spencer Duncan, the defendant, to one Starring, on the purchase of a horse, as the consideration therefor, and payable to Starring’s order. The defendant, Smith Duncan, defended and averred that his name had been forged to the note. Evidence was given upon the trial tending to show that, after delivery of the note to Stamng, the defendant Smith Duncan, had ratified the signature by an…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court —
Mullin, P. J.
It was conceded on the trial that the defendant, Smith Duncan, had not signed the note on which the action is brought, and it was submitted to the jury to say whether, when he told Starring, the payee of the note, that it was all right, he intended thereby to admit that he had authorized his son, or any other person, to affix his name to the note, and the jury found he did not.
The only other ground upon which it can be claimed the defendant, Smith Duncan, could be made liable as maker of the note, was by ratifying or adopting the act of signing by his son or other…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Union Bank v. MiddlebrookSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1865
3Cited by1 opinion
- Title Guarantee & Trust Co. v. HavenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908