Littlehale v. Maberry

43 Me. 264
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedJuly 1, 1857
StatusPublished

This text of 43 Me. 264 (Littlehale v. Maberry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Littlehale v. Maberry, 43 Me. 264 (Me. 1857).

Opinion

Tenney, C. J.

The note in suit was made in Massachusetts, and to hold the endorser thereof, the law of Massachusetts must have been complied with,, in relation to demand and notice.

It is well understood, that in that commonwealth, on all promissory notes, which are negotiable, payable at a future day, grace shall be allowed. R. S. of Mass., of 1836, chap. 33, sec. 5. But whether the note in this case was presented on the day required by the laws of Massachusetts, and payment demanded, is quite immaterial, as it is very certain that the notice to the defendant was defective, in not containing information that the note had been dishonored; and it being given the fourth day after the last day of grace, it was clearly too late; and the endorser was discharged of his liability. Gilbert v. Dennis, 3 Met., 495.

Plaintiff nonsuit.

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

Related

Hammar v. City of Covington
60 Ky. 494 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1861)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
43 Me. 264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/littlehale-v-maberry-me-1857.