Southwick v. Ely
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit «upon a promissory note, dated January 24th, 1840, for $200, payable to Freeman Palmer, or order, in sixty days, at the bank of Troy, N. Y., and endorsed by said Freeman Palmer.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit «upon a promissory note, dated January 24th, 1840, for $200, payable to Freeman Palmer, or order, in sixty days, at the bank of Troy, N. Y., and endorsed by said Freeman Palmer. The defendants pleaded the general issue, and the facts in the case were as follows : The said Freeman Palmer, on the 29th of January, 1840, left the note aforesaid with the plaintiffs, for which they gave a receipt, as follows: “Received, Troy, January 29th, 1840, from Mr. Freeman Palmer, a note signed by Ely & Redington, and endorsed by him, dated January 24th, 1840, at sixty days, for two hundred dollars,…
1Opinion of the CourtWoods, J.
The plaintiffs, in order to maintain this action,
must be shown to have an interest in the note in suit, or to have brought the action for some person having an interest therein, with authority to collect and receive the avails as the payee of the note, or some one showing himself entitled, by reason of an assignment or delivery to him by the payee. Phelps vs. Mahurin, 6 N. H. Rep. 535.
Have the plaintiffs shown themselves to have any interest in the note, or the suit to have been commenced in behalf of any one having an interest, and authorized to collect and receive the avails of the note ?…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Phelps v. MahurinSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1834