Landon v. Bryant

69 Vt. 203
CourtSupreme Court of Vermont
DecidedOctober 15, 1896
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 69 Vt. 203 (Landon v. Bryant) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Vermont primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Landon v. Bryant, 69 Vt. 203 (Vt. 1896).

Opinion

Munson, J.

To charge the endorser of an overdue note, demand must be made and notice given as if the note became due on the day of the endorsement. Nash v. Harrington, 2 Aik. 9. The plaintiff conceded that this had not been done, and sought to hold the defendant on the ground of waiver. The court held there was no evidence tending to show a waiver; and this holding was correct. Giving the testimony the largest scope possible, its only tendency was to show that the defendant understood the note was being bought to give the maker more time. The jury could not be permitted to infer a waiver from the mere fact that the endorser had this understanding.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Foundry Manufacturing Co. v. Farr
119 A. 885 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
69 Vt. 203, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/landon-v-bryant-vt-1896.