Malley v. Weinman

48 Vt. 180
Supreme Court of Vermont·Decided January 15, 1876·Published

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Royce, J.

The declaration in this case contained the general counts in assumpsit; and the plaintiff sought to recover the amount due upon a note executed by the defendant, and made payable to the order of the firm of Malley & Oastello. The note was indorsed in blank, and was admitted as evidence. The plaintiff did not introduce any other evidence; and the only question reserved is, whether the plaintiff upon that evidence was entitled to recover. The same question-was presented in Chase & Green v. Burnham & Dana, 13 Vt. 447; and in Brigham v. Hutchins & Buchanan, 27 Vt. 569; and it was held in both of said cases, that the indorsee of a negotiable promissory note might recover against the maker under the general'money counts. This being the rule, .the plaintiff, upon the evidence introduced by him, was clearly entitled to a judgment.

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.

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

Malley v. Weinman, 48 Vt. 180 (Vt. 1876).

48 Vt. 180 (Malley v. Weinman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Chase v. Burnham
13 Vt. 447 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1841)
Brigham v. Hutchins & Buchanan
27 Vt. 569 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1855)