Legal Opinion

Hixson v. Rodbourn

New York Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1901Published

Action to recover on a promissory note.

1Opinion of the CourtRorbes, J.

This action was brought to recover on a promissory note, which reads as follows:

“ $1000.00. Van Ettenville, N. Y., July 1st, 1884.
“ Six months after date we promise to pay to the order of Mrs. Adelaide Hixson, One Thousand Dollars at our office in Van Ettenville, N. Y., value received with interest.
“ Hixson, Eodbourn & Co.”

The plaintiff is the wife of Amos S. Hixson, who was one of the copartners of said firm who made and delivered the note in question to the plaintiff. He resides at Fresno, Cal. The indebtedness ont of which said cause of action arose was the loan of the sum set forth in…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Albany County Savings Bank v. McCartyNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
  2. Eisenlord v. . ClumNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  3. Comstock v. . HierNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
  4. Carpenter v. . SouleNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  5. Nearpass v. . GilmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1887

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API