Irving Bank v. Wetherald
This text of 34 Barb. 323 (Irving Bank v. Wetherald) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
If the judge was right in finding that the plaintiff was exonerated from liability to the Seventh Ward Bank, by the notice of the mistake, then the note was valid in the hands of the Seventh Ward Bank,-and consequently of any other, party to whom it was transferred.
The subsequent demand and notice of protest was good, and enured to the benefit of the plaintiff.
If the Irving Bank had refused payment, and the Seventh Ward Bank had sued and recovered on it, such recovery would not have been a payment to relieve the parties, but would merely operate to transfer the title to the plaintiff on payment of the judgment.
Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered; costs to abide the event.
Clerke, Gould and Ingraham, Justices.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
34 Barb. 323, 1861 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 120, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/irving-bank-v-wetherald-nysupct-1861.