Bayley v. Taber
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action of assumpsit. The declaration contained a number of counts upon promissory notes made by *the defendants, for sums less than five dollars, and [*452] payable to bearer. The counts were in the usual form, containing the common averments.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit. The declaration contained a number of counts upon promissory notes made by *the defendants, for sums less than five dollars, and [*452] payable to bearer. The counts were in the usual form, containing the common averments. On the trial upon the general issue, which was had before Thatcher, J., at the last May term in this county, the notes were produced, all bearing date before the first of April, 1805, not being wholly in writing, but bearing the impression of printers’ types. The defence at the trial was founded on the statute of 1804, c. 58, in which it is…
1Opinion of the CourtParsons, C. J.
It is our opinion that the direction of the judge m all the points was right.
When the defendants would avoid their promise by availing themselves of the statute, it is incumbent upon them to prove that the notes are within the statute; and the plaintiffs are [ * 453 ] not obliged to show that the notes are * without the statute. Neither are the plaintiffs bound to prove in what manner they acquired the property of notes payable to bearer, unless the defendants will first show that a former lawful holder of the notes lost them, or that they were unlawfully taken from him ; and then the…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Stackpole v. HealyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1819
- Minnesota Loan & Trust Co. v. HannanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1933
- Gillespie v. HannahanCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1828
- McClintick v. JohnstonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana · 1839
- Riggs v. PriceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1851
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.