Morgan v. Van Ingen

New York Supreme Court

Morgan v. Van Ingen

2 Johns. 204

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 15, 1807

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 2 Johns. 204 (Morgan v. Van Ingen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Morgan v. Van Ingen, 2 Johns. 204 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1807).

Pincite

Opinion

Fer Curiam.

The defendant, as a notary, was bound only to demand payment of the note, and to make his protest in case of non-payment. It was no part of his official duty to give the notice to the indorsers. His special undertaking to Atlcinson, that he would give such notice, will not enure to the benefit of the plaintiff. The promise was to Atlcinson, who has no further claim or demand, nor any cause of action against the defendant, since he has been paid the full amount of the note.

Rule refused.

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

Fer Curiam.

The defendant, as a notary, was bound only to demand payment of the note, and to make his protest in case of non-payment. It was no part of his official duty to give the notice to the indorsers. His special undertaking to Atlcinson, that he would give such notice, will not enure to the benefit of the plaintiff. The promise was to Atlcinson, who has no further claim or demand, nor any cause of action against the defendant, since he has been paid the full amount of the note.

Rule refused.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Johns. 204, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morgan-v-van-ingen-nysupct-1807.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack