Furman v. Haskin

2 Cai. Cas. 369
New York Supreme Court·Decided February 15, 1805·Published·Cited by 26 cases

Opinion

Kent, Ch. J.

delivered the opinion of the court. The two objections to this plea, which require consideration, are, 1. That the plaintiff being an innocent endorsee without notice, is not affected by the transactions which took place between Buckle and the defendant; 2. That there is no venue in that part of the plea, alleging the time when the note was negotiated. As to the first, it is a general rule, that a note payable on demand must be presented for payment within a reasonable time, or it will be considered as a note out of time, and dishonored. Chitty, 114,. 146.

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

Furman v. Haskin, 2 Cai. Cas. 369 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1805).

2 Cai. Cas. 369 (Furman v. Haskin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pattillo v. Alexander
29 L.R.A. 616 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1895)
Turner v. Iron Chief Mining Co.
5 L.R.A. 533 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1889)
Mayberry v. Brackett
72 Me. 102 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1881)
Fisher v. Gould
9 Daly 144 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1879)
Herrick v. . Woolverton
41 N.Y. 581 (New York Court of Appeals, 1870)
Herrick v. Woolverton
42 Barb. 50 (New York Supreme Court, 1864)
Merritt v. . Todd
23 N.Y. 28 (New York Court of Appeals, 1861)
Vantrot v. McCulloch
2 Hilt. 272 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1859)
Salmon v. Grosvenor
66 Barb. 160 (New York Supreme Court, 1858)
Wheeler v. Barret
20 Mo. 573 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1855)
Trask v. Martin
1 E.D. Smith 505 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1852)
Niver v. Best
10 Barb. 369 (New York Supreme Court, 1851)
Lockwood v. Crawford
18 Conn. 361 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1847)
Gwin v. McCarroll
9 Miss. 351 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1843)
Cumberland Bank v. Hann
18 N.J.L. 222 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1841)
Potter v. Titcomb
7 Me. 302 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1831)
Bridge v. Johnson
5 Wend. 342 (Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors, 1830)
Aymar & Aymar v. Beers
7 Cow. 705 (New York Supreme Court, 1827)
Hadduck v. Murray
1 N.H. 140 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1817)
Cromwell v. Arrott
1 Serg. & Rawle 180 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1814)