Commercial Bank v. Clark
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit upon a hill of exchange against the defendant as endorser. Plea, the general issue; trial by the court, September Term, 1855, — Pierpoint, J., presiding. The plaintiff introduced the hill of exchange counted upon, with the notarial certificate of protest, together with a writing signed by "the defendant, of which the following is -a copy, viz: “ Commercial Bank OE Albany v. M. Clark. Rutland “ County Court, Sept. Term.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit upon a hill of exchange against the defendant as endorser. Plea, the general issue; trial by the court, September Term, 1855, — Pierpoint, J., presiding. The plaintiff introduced the hill of exchange counted upon, with the notarial certificate of protest, together with a writing signed by "the defendant, of which the following is -a copy, viz: “ Commercial Bank OE Albany v. M. Clark. Rutland “ County Court, Sept. Term. June 6, 1855. I, Merritt Clark, de- “ fendaiit in the above entitled cause, acknowledge and say that I “ had legal and due notice by mail of the protest of…
1Opinion of the Court
*327The opinion of the court was delivered by
Isham, J.
The bill of exchange, on which this action is brought, was duly protested for non-payment. The notice to the defendant, as endorser, of its dishonor, was proved on the trial of the case by his written acknowledgment, in which he admitted that he did receive due and legal notice of the protest and non-payment of the bill. That acknowledgment was full and strong proof that such notice was in fact given to the defendant, and it is not competent for him to avoid or weaken the effect of that admission, by notifying the plaintiffs 'that he should…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Tobey v. BarberNew York Supreme Court · 1809
- State v. McLeranSupreme Court of Vermont · 1826
- Wakefield v. CrossmanSupreme Court of Vermont · 1853
3Cited by1 opinion
- Fortman v. GoepperOhio Supreme Court · 1863