President of the New Hope Delaware Bridge Co. v. Perry
Illinois Supreme Court
This was an action brought by the defendants in error to recover of the plaintiffs in error the amount of certain bank hills, issued by the latter, being an insolvent hanking corporation, in New Jersey.
Read the full summary
This was an action brought by the defendants in error to recover of the plaintiffs in error the amount of certain bank hills, issued by the latter, being an insolvent hanking corporation, in New Jersey. The cause came on to he heard before H. T. Dickey, Judge of the Cook County Court, and a jury, at May term, 1849, and a verdict found and judgment rendered for plaintiffs below, for the sum of $ 8,017. The questions submitted to and adjudicated by the Court, are sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by Treat, C. J.:
The principal question in this case is, whether the holder of bank notes, made payable to bearer, or to a particular person or bearer, can maintain an action on the notes against the corporation issuing them. The statute provides that, “ all promissory notes, bonds, due-bills and other instruments in writing, made or to be made, by any person or persons, body politic or corporate, whereby such person or persons promise or agree to pay any sum of money or articles of personal property, or any sum of money in personal property, or acknowledge any sum of money or article…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Wallace v. McConnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1839
- Haxton v. BishopNew York Supreme Court · 1829
- Ruggles v. PattenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1812
3Cited by5 opinions
- Humphreys v. MortonIllinois Supreme Court · 1881
- Hardin v. SweeneyWashington Supreme Court · 1896
- Scroggin v. McClellandNebraska Supreme Court · 1893
- Barber v. BellIllinois Supreme Court · 1875
- Northwestern National Bank v. PearsonWashington Supreme Court · 1918