Whittlesey & Stone v. Dean
Supreme Court of Vermont
THIS is an action on the following described note, viz:— “$196,41. Cornish, June 10, 1820. “For value received of Whittlesey & Stone, I promise to pay “them, or order, one hundred and ninety-six dollars and “forty-one cents, with interest, on the first day of October, “1821. (Signed) . lemuel dean.” Defendant admits the execution of the Dote.
Read the full summary
THIS is an action on the following described note, viz:— “$196,41. Cornish, June 10, 1820. “For value received of Whittlesey & Stone, I promise to pay “them, or order, one hundred and ninety-six dollars and “forty-one cents, with interest, on the first day of October, “1821. (Signed) . lemuel dean.” Defendant admits the execution of the Dote. There was paid and endorsed on the same, Oct. 15, 1822, p6. On the 1st day of July, 1822, the defendant endorsed to the plaintiffs (in blank) a note executed by Benjamin Smith to the defendant, for $S0, dated 16th Oct. 1821, and payable to defendant or…
1Opinion of the Court
Skinner, Ch. J.
pronounced the opinion of the Court.
Whether the plaintiff is to be regarded as the endorsee of the notes against Smith, and subjected to the ordinary duties of making seasonable demand and giving notice, or as the agent of Dean in obtaining payment and satisfaction of- the maker, is not a question to which our attehííon has been particularly called, as in either point of view, we consider he has made the notes his own, and of course his claim upon the note here in suit against the defendant is extinguished.
As endorsee of the notes, it was his duty to have presented them for…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Inglee v. CoolidgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1817
- Woodbridge v. BrighamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815
- Crain v. ColwellNew York Supreme Court · 1811