Sherman v. Crosby
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit on a promissory note, for 600 dollars, payable to the plaintiff, or order, on demand, with interesti The defendants pleaded non assumpsit, with notice of a set-off. The cause ivas tried at the Broome circuit, in May, ’ 1813, before Mr. Justice Spencer.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit on a promissory note, for 600 dollars, payable to the plaintiff, or order, on demand, with interesti The defendants pleaded non assumpsit, with notice of a set-off. The cause ivas tried at the Broome circuit, in May, ’ 1813, before Mr. Justice Spencer. Ti support of their set-off, the defendants gave in evidence a WI‘id;en authority from the plaintiff, dated November 17, 1810, by which he authorized Thomas Crosby, one of the defendants, to settle a suit then depending between the plaintiff and John Bennet, in the supreme court, Samuel Sherwood, attorney, and “…
1Per curiam
The only question made at the trial was, whether the receipt was competent evidence of the payment by T. Crosby. It was proved to have been signed by Bennet, and as the plaintiff had instructed the defendant, T. Crosby, to settle the suit of Bennet against the plaintiff, and pay the demand and costs for him, the receipt of Bennet was prima facie evidence of the demand and payment, and it was not requisite for the defendant to make out, in the first instance, the legality of Bennetts demand, or highér evidence of the payment. The plaintiff had given the defendant a. discretion to adjust the…
2Cited by15 opinions
- People v. DavisIllinois Supreme Court · 1915
- Hatch v. BentonNew York Supreme Court · 1849
- Walnut Ridge Mercantile Co. v. CohnSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
- Lee's Ex'rs v. Virginia & Maryland Bridge Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1881
- McRea v. Ins. Bank of ColumbusSupreme Court of Alabama · 1849
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.