Bank of Rochester v. Gould
This text of 9 Wend. 279 (Bank of Rochester v. Gould) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
By the Court,
Within the principle of the cases of 2 Johns. C. 337, and 3 Wendell, 456, the plaintiffs are entitled to retain the verdict. The notice was sufficient to put the defendant upon inquiry, and the testimony well warranted the jury in coming to the conclusion that he was not misled by the mis-description of the note. The fact that there was no other note of Fisher’s endorsed by the defendant in the bank, together with his admission to the cashier, were conclusive that the defendant could not have been misled by the notice, and that it had fully answered its object.
New trial denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
9 Wend. 279, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-of-rochester-v-gould-nysupct-1832.