Church v. Howard
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment in favor of tbe defendant, entered upon the verdict of a jury. The action was brought upon a promissory note made by the defendant Fargo, to the order of plaintiff’s intestate, and signed by defendant Howard as surety. The latter defended on the ground, among others, that after the execution and delivery of the note, a material alteration was made without his knowledge or consent.
1Opinion of the Court
Bockes, J. :
The defendant Howard was surety on the note in suit in its original form, which note then read as follows, to wit:
$2,000.
“ Two years from date, I promise to pay Mary M. Church, or *6' » bearer, $2,000 with interest, semi-annually at seven per cent in gold or its equivalent, value received.
“A. G. FARGO.
“ Seth Howard, surety.
“ Eaton, January 18, 1870.”
The jury found on the evidence submitted on the trial that the note, after its inception, was altered by erasing the words in gold or its equivalent, and that such alteration was made under the direction, or with the approval-of the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Bronson v. RodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Elwood v. DeifendorfNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Rodes v. . BronsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Butler v. HorwitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Lane v. DotyNew York Supreme Court · 1848
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.