Carter v. Hamilton
New York Supreme Court
This was an action Brought to recover the balance due on a promissory note, bearing date December 8, 1848, made by the defendants, payable to John Ooe, executor of Luther Carter deceased, or bearer, for $1033,88, with interest, upon which it was admitted the sum of $940,04 had been paid; and $155,94 was still claimed by the plaintiff, to whom the note had been assigned, as remaining due on the note.
Read the full summary
This was an action Brought to recover the balance due on a promissory note, bearing date December 8, 1848, made by the defendants, payable to John Ooe, executor of Luther Carter deceased, or bearer, for $1033,88, with interest, upon which it was admitted the sum of $940,04 had been paid; and $155,94 was still claimed by the plaintiff, to whom the note had been assigned, as remaining due on the note. In the answer the defendants set forth that the said Coe was executor of Luther Carter deceased; that at the date of the note the said executor caused certain personal property, belonging to the…
1Opinion of the Court
*149By the Court,
Taylor, J.
The principles of law, as applicable to cases bearing a resemblance to this, are well settled; and the reported decisions are very numerous. The only difficulty arises from the facts as governed by one principle of law, running into those applicable to another, with such slight shades of difference as sometimes to raise a doubt where the dividing line is found.
No principle can be better settled upon authority than this, that parol or extrinsic evidence, namely, is not, in general, receivable to contradict, vary or explain a written instrument. It would be inconvenient,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Northrop v. SpearySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1802
3Cited by4 opinions
- Milan Bank v. RichmondSupreme Court of Missouri · 1911
- Sheldon v. HeatonNew York Supreme Court · 1895
- Cook v. EatonNew York Supreme Court · 1853
- Carter v. HamiltonNew York Court of Appeals · 1854