Liberty Nat. Bank of New York v. Burr
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
At Law. Assumpsit by the Liberty National Bapk of New York against Charles H. Burr. On rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
1Opinion of the Court
DICKINSON, District Judge.
This controversy suggests many academically interesting questions and raises some of great practical imr-portance. The case concerns itself with bills of exchange drawn and accepted in London and made payable there. The promise was to pay in pounds sterling. The cause of action is based upon what by the acceptance is the equivalent of the promissory note of the defendant, payable in pounds sterling. Any judgment entered must be for a sum expressed' in the money of account of the United States. The only controversy is over the fixing of this sum.
The acts of Congress…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Effinger v. KenneySupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Stewart v. SalamonSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Wood, Bacon & Co. v. KelsoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1857
- Rives v. DukeSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
3Cited by5 opinions
- Competex, S.A. (In Liquidation) v. Ronald LabowCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1986
- Shaw, Savill, Albion & Co., Ltd. v. The Fredericksburg. The TamaroaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1951
- El Universal, Compania Periodistica Nacional, S.A. De C v. v. Phoenician Imports, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1991
- Page v. LevensonDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1922
- Shaw, Savill, Albion & Co., Ltd. v. The Fredericksburg. The TamaroaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1951