Griffith Assignee v. Cox

Tennessee Superior Court for Law and Equity

Griffith Assignee v. Cox

1 Tenn. 210

Tennessee Superior Court for Law and Equity·Decided September 6, 1806·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The date being lost does not destroy the paper; and though there has been an alteration in the date of the assignment, we are of opinion, that the liability continues upon it. The date does not seem to make an essential part of it, and ought not to be compared to an alteration in a deed, or a material part of a bill of exchange, which in such a case would destroy the validity of the paper.

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

Per Curiam.

The date being lost does not destroy the paper; and though there has been an alteration in the date of the assignment, we are of opinion, that the liability continues upon it. The date does not seem to make an essential part of it, and ought not to be compared to an alteration in a deed, or a material part of a bill of exchange, which in such a case would destroy the validity of the paper.

Griffith Assignee v. Cox, 1 Tenn. 210 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1806).

Pincite

1 Tenn. 210 (Griffith Assignee v. Cox) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.