Legal Opinion

Fosdick v. Starbuck

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided December 2, 1837PublishedCited by 5 opinions

In error.

1Opinion of the Court

THE assignee of a promissory note, given without consideration, may sue the assignor at any time, and without having previously sued the maker. Howell v. Wilson, 2 Blackf. 418.

The maker of a promissory note is a competent, witness for the plaintiff, in an action by the assignee against the assignor, involving the validity of the consideration of the note.

The statute requiring an oath to a plea, replication, &c., denying the execution of an instrument of writing, &c., does not dispense with the production of the instrument on the trial: it only excuses proof of the execution of the instrument,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Howell v. WilsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1831

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Glenn v. PorterIndiana Supreme Court · 1875
  2. Collins v. MagheeIndiana Supreme Court · 1869
  3. Stutsman v. ThomasIndiana Supreme Court · 1872
  4. Rich v. SovacoolIndiana Supreme Court · 1858
  5. Swiggett v. SeymourU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana · 1868

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

Powered by the Exa API