Hazard v. Hazard
This text of 57 A. 1056 (Hazard v. Hazard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
A nonsuit was granted in this case upon the ground that, as the plaintiff claimed that his endorsement of a check payable to his order had been procured in New York by false pretences, he could not maintain an action for the proceeds of the check without first proceeding against the defendant in a criminal prosecution, under the statute of this State.
The action in the worst aspect could only be for. deceit, and even if it were for a crime, the crime was not committed in this State and could not be prosecuted here.
The plaintiff, very absurdly, stated the claim in his bill of particulars for “cash obtained by false pretences and fraudulent representations on check for $500, payable to the plaintiff;” but this could not make the transaction a crime in the absence of proof.
The cheek, as produced, with the plaintiff’s testimony that it was transferred without consideration and that the defendant received the money on it, made a prima facie case without any suggestion of a crime.
Plaintiff’s petition for a new trial granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
57 A. 1056, 26 R.I. 32, 1904 R.I. LEXIS 7, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hazard-v-hazard-ri-1904.