Dudley v. Wells

55 Me. 145
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided July 1, 1867·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Appleton, C. J.

By the Act of Congress of March 3, 1865, a draft or note is declared "invalid and of no effect” when there is an "intent to evade the provisions of this Act.” To authorize the Court to declare an unstamped instrument void, there must be an intent to evade the law. Whether there was such an intent or not is not made to appear. The inquiry is not made of the trustee, nor is there any proof on the subject. The note is not shown to be absolutely " invalid and of no effect.” Hitchcock v. Sawyer, 39 Vermont, 413; Tobey v. Chipman, 13 Allen, 123; Govern v. Littlefield, 13 Allen, 127; Willey v. Robinson, 13 Allen, 128; McGovern v. Hoesback, 53 Penn. State Rep., 177. Exceptions overruled.

Cutting, Walton, Dickerson, Barrows and Taplev, JJ., concurred.

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

Dudley v. Wells, 55 Me. 145 (Me. 1867).

55 Me. 145 (Dudley v. Wells) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Waterbury v. McMillan
46 Miss. 635 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1872)
Sawyer v. Parker
57 Me. 39 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1869)