First Nat. Bank v. Stuetzer

New York Supreme Court

First Nat. Bank v. Stuetzer

30 N.Y.S. 83, 80 Hun 435, 87 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 435, 61 N.Y. St. Rep. 823

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 27, 1894

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 30 N.Y.S. 83 (First Nat. Bank v. Stuetzer) 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

First Nat. Bank v. Stuetzer, 30 N.Y.S. 83, 80 Hun 435, 87 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 435, 61 N.Y. St. Rep. 823 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

DYKMAN, J.

This is an appeal by the defendants William T. Wallis and George T. Smith from- a judgment entered against them and the other defendants. The action is upon a promissory note in the following form:

“$1,100. Jersey City, N. J., Jan. 20, 1893.

Wallis Aon Works.

“Three months after date, we promise to pay to the order of H. Stuetzer & Co. eleven hundred dollars, at the First National Bank of Jersey City, value received.

“William T. Wallis, President.

“George T. Smith, Treasurer.”

On the day of its date, the note was presented by the defendant Herman Stuetzer, one of the members of the firm to whom it was payable, to the plaintiff, for discount, and it was discounted by the plaintiff, and the proceeds paid to Stuetzer. When the note was discounted, no knowledge had been communicated to the plaintiff respecting the purpose for which the note was given. The discount was made on the faith of Stuetzer, without inquiry or knowledge whether it was the note of the Wallis Iron Works, or the individual note of the defendants Wallis and Smith, except what appeared upon the face of the note. Under such circumstances, the plaintiff was authorized to treat the note as the personal obligation of the persons whose names are signed to the paper as makers. The plaintiff was a bona fide holder for value, and the case is controlled by the cases of Casco Nat. Bank v. Clark, 139 N. Y. 307, 34 N. E. 908, and Merchants’ Nat. Bank v. Clark, 139 N. Y. 314, 34 N. E. 910. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs. All concur.

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

DYKMAN, J.

This is an appeal by the defendants William T. Wallis and George T. Smith from- a judgment entered against them and the other defendants. The action is upon a promissory note in the following form:

“$1,100. Jersey City, N. J., Jan. 20, 1893.

Wallis Aon Works.

“Three months after date, we promise to pay to the order of H. Stuetzer & Co. eleven hundred dollars, at the First National Bank of Jersey City, value received.

“William T. Wallis, President.

“George T. Smith, Treasurer.”

On the day of its date, the note was presented by the defendant Herman Stuetzer, one of the members of the firm to whom it was payable, to the plaintiff, for discount, and it was discounted by the plaintiff, and the proceeds paid to Stuetzer. When the note was discounted, no knowledge had been communicated to the plaintiff respecting the purpose for which the note was given. The discount was made on the faith of Stuetzer, without inquiry or knowledge whether it was the note of the Wallis Iron Works, or the individual note of the defendants Wallis and Smith, except what appeared upon the face of the note. Under such circumstances, the plaintiff was authorized to treat the note as the personal obligation of the persons whose names are signed to the paper as makers. The plaintiff was a bona fide holder for value, and the case is controlled by the cases of Casco Nat. Bank v. Clark, 139 N. Y. 307, 34 N. E. 908, and Merchants’ Nat. Bank v. Clark, 139 N. Y. 314, 34 N. E. 910. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 N.Y.S. 83, 80 Hun 435, 87 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 435, 61 N.Y. St. Rep. 823, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/first-nat-bank-v-stuetzer-nysupct-1894.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack