Samuel Streit & Co. v. Sanborn
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit in favor of the plaintiffs as indorsors, against the defendant as maker, of a promissory note, dated at Chelsea, Vt., March 1, 1870, for $137.16, payable to the order of Erwin & McKelsey, three months from date, with interest, at the Orange County National Bank, at said Chelsea. Plea, general issue, and trial by the court, December term, 1873, Peck, J., presiding.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit in favor of the plaintiffs as indorsors, against the defendant as maker, of a promissory note, dated at Chelsea, Vt., March 1, 1870, for $137.16, payable to the order of Erwin & McKelsey, three months from date, with interest, at the Orange County National Bank, at said Chelsea. Plea, general issue, and trial by the court, December term, 1873, Peck, J., presiding. The signature of defendant as maker of the note, was admitted, and the indorsement to plaintiffs proved, and the note read in evidence. It appeared that in 1869, and at the time in question, the payees of the note were…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Royce, J.
The consideration for the note for which the note declared upon was given, was intoxicating liquor sold by the payees of the note, through their agent, Knight, under such circumstances that it is conceded that as between the parties to the *706note, the transaction was of such an illegal character that the payees could not enforce its collection. The note was in due course of business negotiated and indorsed to the plaintiffs while current, for a valuable consideration, and without any notice as to what it was given for. The question presented…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Converse v. FosterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1860
- Pindar v. BarlowSupreme Court of Vermont · 1859
3Cited by2 opinions
- Whitehead v. CokerAlabama Court of Appeals · 1917
- Pierce v. KibbeeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1879