Beeding v. Pic

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

Beeding v. Pic

3 F. Cas. 63, 2 D.C. 152, 2 Cranch 152

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

DecidedJune 15, 1818

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 3 F. Cas. 63 (Beeding v. Pic) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Beeding v. Pic, 3 F. Cas. 63, 2 D.C. 152, 2 Cranch 152 (circtddc 1818).

Pincite

Opinion

The CouRT

(nem. con.) said the payment should have been demanded of Bayley on the third day of grace, and the protest and notice to the indorsers should be on the day after, and referred to the case of Lindenberger v. Beale, at December term, 1813, of this Court. S. C. 6 Wheat. 104.

A juror was withdrawn by consent, and the cause continued. See Renner v. Bank of Columbia, 9 Wheat. 582, and Mills v. Bank of United States, 11 Wheat, 431, 436, as to the usage of banks in making demand of payment on the 4th day.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The CouRT

(nem. con.) said the payment should have been demanded of Bayley on the third day of grace, and the protest and notice to the indorsers should be on the day after, and referred to the case of Lindenberger v. Beale, at December term, 1813, of this Court. S. C. 6 Wheat. 104.

A juror was withdrawn by consent, and the cause continued. See Renner v. Bank of Columbia, 9 Wheat. 582, and Mills v. Bank of United States, 11 Wheat, 431, 436, as to the usage of banks in making demand of payment on the 4th day.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 F. Cas. 63, 2 D.C. 152, 2 Cranch 152, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beeding-v-pic-circtddc-1818.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack