Atwood v. Fisk
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Two bills in equity to compel the surrender or cancellation of two overdue promissory notes, dated in 1861, and signed by the plaintiffs respectively, with Joseph Atwood, each note for the payment by the promisors, jointly and severally, to the order of the defendants, of $1340, in equal semiannual instalments of $67, with interest; and of two mortgages of real estate, containing the usual power of sale clauses, given by the plaintiffs, respectively, to the defendants, to…
Read the full summary
Two bills in equity to compel the surrender or cancellation of two overdue promissory notes, dated in 1861, and signed by the plaintiffs respectively, with Joseph Atwood, each note for the payment by the promisors, jointly and severally, to the order of the defendants, of $1340, in equal semiannual instalments of $67, with interest; and of two mortgages of real estate, containing the usual power of sale clauses, given by the plaintiffs, respectively, to the defendants, to secure the payment of the notes. The ground on which the bills were sought to be maintained was, that the consideration of…
1Opinion of the CourtAmes, J.
A note, given in consideration of a composition of felony, or of a promise not to prosecute for a crime of a lower degree than a felony, is illegal, and cannot be enforced by the *364promisee against the promisor. And it makes no difference that, of various elements making up the entire consideration, a part, and even the larger part, was legal and valid. If part of the con-, sideration was illegal, the effect upon the note would be the same as if the whole were illegal. The plaintiffs insist that the notes referred'to in their bills of complaint fall within this rule of law.
But it has also long…
2Cited by35 opinions
- St. Louis, Vandalia & Terre Haute Railroad v. Terre Haute & Indianapolis RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Arcidi v. National Ass'n of Government Employees, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2006
- Berman v. CoakleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
- City of Chicago v. Union Stock Yards & Transit Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1896
- Drinkall v. Movius State BankNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1901
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.