Legal Opinion

Babcock v. Bridge

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 6, 1859PublishedCited by 2 opinions

THIS action was brought to enforce a mortgage bearing date March 12, 1855, executed by Hiram Peets to the plaintiff, conditioned as follows: • “ Whereas the said Alexander Babcock has this day signed as surety, a note bearing date the 12th day of March, 1855, executed by the said Hiram Peets and payable to the Rochester City Bank, for the sum of $1500 in ninety days after date; and whereas the said Alexander Babcock has agreed to and with the said Hiram Peets, to sign as…

Read the full summary

THIS action was brought to enforce a mortgage bearing date March 12, 1855, executed by Hiram Peets to the plaintiff, conditioned as follows: • “ Whereas the said Alexander Babcock has this day signed as surety, a note bearing date the 12th day of March, 1855, executed by the said Hiram Peets and payable to the Rochester City Bank, for the sum of $1500 in ninety days after date; and whereas the said Alexander Babcock has agreed to and with the said Hiram Peets, to sign as surety, (or indorse the same,) during the ensuing year, other notes for the said Hiram Peets, payable at the Rochester City…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court, T. R. Strong, J.

In the view I take of this case, it is not important to determine whether the note, for the collection of which the mortgage in question is sought to be enforced, is embraced within the general words of the condition of the mortgage. It is clear that it is not of the description of notes the defendant had agreed to sign as surety or indorse for Peets to a limited amount, according to the recital in the condition; as the latter were to be payable at the Rochester City Bank, or some of the other banks in the city of Rochester, and this note is payable at large. If…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Pettibone v. GriswoldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1822
  2. Youngs v. WilsonNew York Supreme Court · 1857

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Madigan v. MeadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
  2. Bright v. BuckmanUnited States Circuit Court for the Northern District of Florida · 1889

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

Powered by the Exa API