Hudson v. Goodwin

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Hudson v. Goodwin

5 H. & J. 115

CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland

DecidedJune 15, 1820

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 5 H. & J. 115 (Hudson v. Goodwin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Maryland primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hudson v. Goodwin, 5 H. & J. 115 (Md. 1820).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Buchanan, J.

There is nothing in the objection, that the name of JohnEdwarcl Dorsey is not sufficiently set out. But the endorsement on the note, on which the suit was brought, appears to be in blank; and though the plaintiff might have "filled it up at any time before verdict, yet not having done so, he is not entitled to recover. There is nor distinction between this and the case of Ringgold vs. Tyson, decided by this court at December term, 1810, and we see nothing to shake the authority of that case.

JUDGMENT REVERSED,

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

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Buchanan, J.

There is nothing in the objection, that the name of JohnEdwarcl Dorsey is not sufficiently set out. But the endorsement on the note, on which the suit was brought, appears to be in blank; and though the plaintiff might have "filled it up at any time before verdict, yet not having done so, he is not entitled to recover. There is nor distinction between this and the case of Ringgold vs. Tyson, decided by this court at December term, 1810, and we see nothing to shake the authority of that case.

JUDGMENT REVERSED,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 H. & J. 115, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hudson-v-goodwin-md-1820.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack