Hastings v. Wiswall
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Assumpsit by the endorsee against the endorser of a promissory note of the following tenor, viz. “ Cambridge, June 5th, 1804. — For value received of Mr. Isaac Nichols, I promise to pay him or order the sum of three thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars in five years from date, with interest annually Asa Nichols.” The defendant was defaulted at the last term, and the action was continued for judgment by consent to this term.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit by the endorsee against the endorser of a promissory note of the following tenor, viz. “ Cambridge, June 5th, 1804. — For value received of Mr. Isaac Nichols, I promise to pay him or order the sum of three thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars in five years from date, with interest annually Asa Nichols.” The defendant was defaulted at the last term, and the action was continued for judgment by consent to this term. Upon inspection of the note, it appeared that the interest had been paid for the two first years. — The plaintiff now moves the court for judgment, and for a direction…
1Opinion of the Court
But the Court
denied the motion, observing that the plaintiff might have brought his action for the interest at the expiration of *379each year, and that by neglecting this he might be considered as waiving his claim to compound interest. The clerk was directed to add simple interest to the principal for the time that the interest remained unpaid, and to enter up judgment for that amount with costs.
Munroe. for the plaintiff. Fay for the defendant, (a)
2Cited by25 opinions
- Mowry v. BishopNew York Court of Chancery · 1835
- Genin v. IngersollWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1877
- Cooley v. RoseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Cox v. SmithNevada Supreme Court · 1865
- Cutler v. Board of SupervisorsMississippi Supreme Court · 1878
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.