Traders' National Bank v. Parker
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered upon an order made January 24, 1890, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. In order to recover, plaintiff must show some consideration for defendant’s signature of the note.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered upon an order made January 24, 1890, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. In order to recover, plaintiff must show some consideration for defendant’s signature of the note. (Good v. Martin, 95 U. S. 90; Green v. Shepherd, 87 Mass. 589; Daniels on Neg. Inst. § 1760; Rand. on Comcl. Paper, § 446; Baylies on Sureties, 56; Brandt on Sureties, § 9; Tenney v.…
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
On or about February 11, 1884, the plaintiff' was the owner and holder of an over-due promissory note for-$10,265.65, made by one J. P. Hodgson and one F. W. James, and was insisting upon the payment thereof and threatening to bring suit thereon against the makers. The defendant thereupon, with a view to obtain an extension of time for the payment of said note, affixed his signature thereto under the signatures of Hodgson and James.
This action is upon the contract thus made, and the defense relied upon in this court to defeat a recovery is that no consideration for the defendant’s contract…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Green v. . RoworthNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Calkins v. ChandlerMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
- Elting v. VanderlynNew York Supreme Court · 1809
- Watson v. RandallNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Atlantic Nat. Bank of N.Y. v. . FranklinNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- New York State Energy Research & Development Authority v. Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.District Court, W.D. New York · 1983
- Security National Bank of Minneapolis v. PulverSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
- Whalen v. . StuartNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
- Powers v. WoolfolkMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908
- Berner v. KayeNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1895
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.