Dowden v. Calvin
This text of 2 N.Y.S. 161 (Dowden v. Calvin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Common Pleas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
If the note in suit was given for the accommodation of Dowden, (and we think the jury might reasonably have drawn that conclusion from the testimony,) he cannot recover upon it. Whether the note was an accommodation note, or whether it was given because the defendants did not dispute their legal liability upon the former note that was signed in their names by La Large, is the question that ought to have been submitted to the the jury. It was, in our opinion, an error to direct a verdict. There is no question of usury in the case. Judgment reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2 N.Y.S. 161, 1888 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 81, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dowden-v-calvin-nyctcompl-1888.