Chenowith & Co. v. Chamberlin
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Error to the Jefferson Circuit. Chawcery. Case 15. The case stated. Judgment of 1 Circuit Court. a biliofexch’ge zen of Kentucky other^Ste^and ^a¡?letót!en foreign bin of exohan£e- A protest regularly made in due form, is necessary to a recovery on a foreign bill of exchange in the courts of Kentucky — and presentation and noting for nonpayment must be by a Notary himself; by his cle-k is not sufficient, unless there be proof that presentment and demand of payment by the…
Read the full summary
Error to the Jefferson Circuit. Chawcery. Case 15. The case stated. Judgment of 1 Circuit Court. a biliofexch’ge zen of Kentucky other^Ste^and ^a¡?letót!en foreign bin of exohan£e- A protest regularly made in due form, is necessary to a recovery on a foreign bill of exchange in the courts of Kentucky — and presentation and noting for nonpayment must be by a Notary himself; by his cle-k is not sufficient, unless there be proof that presentment and demand of payment by the clerk of the Notary is sanctioned by the customof the city or place -where the bill is payable. One member of a ?rm…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Ewing
Wh. P. Soott, of Louisville, drew a bill of exchange in favor of Chenowith & Co. on the firm of Scott & Co., of New Orleans, of which he was a member, for the sum of $1,895 82, payable six months after date, which was indorsed, as accommodation indorsers, by Thayer & Co. and accepted by Scott & Co. The indorsement of the firm of Thayer&Co. was made byThayer, one ofthe firm, without the knowledge of Chamberlin, the other member of the firm, and the fact of the indorsement by Thayer, one of the firm, w'as known to the plaintiffs. The bill was protested for non-payment, and the protest regularly…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Commercial Bank v. BarksdaleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1865
- Miltenberger v. SpauldingSupreme Court of Missouri · 1863
- Piner v. ClaryCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1856