Loud v. Merrill

47 Me. 351
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided July 1, 1860·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In an action upon a promissory note, though, the suit is by an indorsee against an indorser, and the note is payable in another State, no damages for protest are allowed, as upon bills of exchange.

Upon being informally presented again by cpunsel, and [352]*352argued upon that point, the Court were unanimously of the opinion, that promissory notes, though negotiated, were not within the provisions of § 35, c. 82, of the B. S. of 1851, relating to that subject; and no such damages were allowed.

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

Loud v. Merrill, 47 Me. 351 (Me. 1860).

47 Me. 351 (Loud v. Merrill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Davis v. Safe Insurance Co.
185 S.E. 690 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1936)