Bogert v. Lingo

3 Cai. Cas. 92
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedMay 15, 1805
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 3 Cai. Cas. 92 (Bogert v. Lingo) 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.

Bluebook
Bogert v. Lingo, 3 Cai. Cas. 92 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1805).

Opinion

Per curiam.

The judge ought to have nonsuited the plaintiffs at the trial, the verdict must therefore be set aside with costs to abide the event of the suit. Thel’e was not evidence sufficient, that Lingo was one of the house of M'Guire & Co. who drew the bill, to let the cause go to the jury. It was a verdict clearly against the weight of evidence, and ruled wrong by the judge. The court, however, do not decide between the case in Sayer, and that in D. & E. nor whether it was, in the present instance necessary to prove the handwriting of the indorsor,- because it is not necessary to the judgment we now deliver.

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

Related

Winship v. the Bank of the United States
30 U.S. 529 (Supreme Court, 1831)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 Cai. Cas. 92, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bogert-v-lingo-nysupct-1805.