Fosdick v. Starbuck
This text of 4 Blackf. 417 (Fosdick v. Starbuck) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
THE assignee of a promissory note, given without consideration, may sue the assignor at any time, and without having previously sued the maker. Howell v. Wilson, 2 Blackf. 418.
The maker of a promissory note is a competent, witness for the plaintiff, in an action by the assignee against the assignor, involving the validity of the consideration of the note.
The statute requiring an oath to a plea, replication, &c., denying the execution of an instrument of writing, &c., does not dispense with the production of the instrument on the trial: it only excuses proof of the execution of the instrument, when such plea, &c. is without oath.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
4 Blackf. 417, 1837 Ind. LEXIS 73, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fosdick-v-starbuck-ind-1837.