Colt v. Noble
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was assumpsit against the defendant as endorser of a bill of exchange drawn at New South Wales, by W. Cox, on Cox &f Greenwood, in London, for 695L sterling, payable to the defendant or his order, sixty days after sight; and the declaration states an endorsement by the defendant to the plaintiffs, the usual protests for nonacceptance and non-payment, and notice thereof to the defendant.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was afterwards delivered to the following effect by
Parsons, C. J.
The point in this cause substantially submitted to the decision of the Court is, whether the agents in London of the holders of the bill in Madras were bound to give notice of the protest to the defendant, the endorser, or only to return the bill with the protests to their principals, who were seasonably to give notice.
We do not find this question expressly settled by any decision in point. It is stated in Kyd on Exchange [page 118.], that when a *128bill is remitted to a factor to procure acceptance, it is…
2Cited by20 opinions
- Mead v. EngsNew York Supreme Court · 1826
- Gindrat v. Mechanics' Bank of AugustaSupreme Court of Alabama · 1845
- Hamilton v. CunninghamU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Virginia · 1828
- Bank of the United States v. GoddardU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1829
- West River Bank v. TaylorNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.