Grew v. Burditt
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Assumpsit on a promissory note, dated January 23d, 1824, for $2233,33, payable to James White or order in one year, with interest semiannually, and by White indorsed to the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit on a promissory note, dated January 23d, 1824, for $2233,33, payable to James White or order in one year, with interest semiannually, and by White indorsed to the plaintiff. Trial before Wilde J. The interest on the note had been paid by the defendant as it became due, the last payment being in January 1827. The defendant offered, in defence, to go into evidence of certain copartnership transactions between- himself and the plaintiff’s testator in 1818 and subsequent years, by which it might appear that there had been such errors arising out of the mode of keeping the books of the…
1Per curiam
The evidence offered by the defendant was objected to, because as the plaintiff sues as indorsee of a note indorsed to him before it became due, it is improper to allow transactions between the defendant and other persons to affect the validity of the note or operate by way of set-off. It is said the evidence would vary and control the written contract, and prove it to have been made by two instead of three parties The defendant offered to show that the note was made in the form in which it appears, solely to obtain White’s name as security. The general rule, that parol evidence is not…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Savage v. DavisNew York Supreme Court · 1831