McFetrich v. Woodrow
This text of 38 A. 18 (McFetrich v. Woodrow) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The note was not a valid contract until it was negotiated and. delivered to the plaintiff for value. Jameson was not •entitled to notice of non-payment. He was liable to the plaintiff, *175 not as endorser, but as maker. Martin v. Boyd, 11 N. H. 385; Benton v. Willard, 17 N. H. 593; Currier v. Fellows, 27 N. H. 366; Phillips v. Johnson, 64 N. H. 393, 400. On the facts found, it is immaterial that, for the purpose of giving the plaintiff title to the note, Williams endorsed it above the name of Jameson.
Judgment for the plaintiffs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
38 A. 18, 67 N.H. 174, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcfetrich-v-woodrow-nh-1891.