Dudley v. Wells

55 Me. 145
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedJuly 1, 1867
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 55 Me. 145 (Dudley v. Wells) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

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

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

Related

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
55 Me. 145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dudley-v-wells-me-1867.