Norris v. Ward
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, on a negotiable promissory note payable to the defendant and endorsed by him to the plaintiff before maturity.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, on a negotiable promissory note payable to the defendant and endorsed by him to the plaintiff before maturity. Facts found by a referee. 1. There was no demand of payment upon the maker and notice of the dishonor to the defendant such as is required by the law merchant to fix the liability of an indorser. 2. After the dishonor, the defendant promised the plaintiff to pay the note. 3. At the time of making the promise the defendant knew that he had not received due notice of the dishonor of the note. 4. At the time of making the promise he did not know that by the law he was…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
It does not appear that the defendant, when he promised to pay the note after its dishonor, knew that no demand had been made upon the maker at the maturity of the note. In order to render his promise effectual, he must have known that no demand had been made. Ladd v. Kenney, 2 N. H. 340; Otis v. Hussey, 3 N. H. 346; Whitney v. Abbott, 5 N. H. 379; Farrington v. Brown, 7 N. H. 271; Woodman v. Eastman, 10 N. H. 366; Bank v. Brown, 12 N. H. 325; Caldwell v. Porter, 17 N. H. 27; Rogers v. Hackett, 21 N. H. 100; Edwards v. Tandy, 36 N. H. 544; Hopkins v. Liswell, 12 Mass. 52; 3 Kent Com. 113.
Judgm…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hopkins v. LiswellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815
3Cited by1 opinion
- Rochester Savings Bank v. ChickSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1887