Everett & Brown v. Vendryes

25 Barb. 383, 1857 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 161
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 4, 1857
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 25 Barb. 383 (Everett & Brown v. Vendryes) 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
Everett & Brown v. Vendryes, 25 Barb. 383, 1857 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 161 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1857).

Opinions

Roosevelt, J.

This was an action by the indorsees, against the drawer, of a bill of exchange made in Oarthagena, (New Granada,) but payable in New York; and protested for nonacceptance. The defense is that it was not duly indorsed by the payee. We hold that being payable in New York, the instrument, as to the mode of its transfer, is governed by the laws of New York, and that by those laws a general indorsement like the one before us, is sufficient to transfer a bill or note, wherever made.

The exceptions must be overruled and judgment for the plaintiffs affirmed, with costs.

Davies, J., concurred.

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

Related

Knickerbocker Life Insurance v. Ecclesine
6 Abb. Pr. 9 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1869)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 Barb. 383, 1857 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 161, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/everett-brown-v-vendryes-nysupct-1857.