Palmer v. Blight

18 F. Cas. 1022, 2 Wash. C. C. 96
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania
DecidedOctober 15, 1807
StatusPublished

This text of 18 F. Cas. 1022 (Palmer v. Blight) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Palmer v. Blight, 18 F. Cas. 1022, 2 Wash. C. C. 96 (circtdpa 1807).

Opinion

BY THE COURT.

It is true, the bills should be produced, or otherwise accounted for, by proving them to be lost, or in a situation not to be again brought against the defendants; and the evidence in this case, shows them to be before the commissioners in England, for the purpose of obtaining a dividend on the estate of the drawee. The evidence, if believed by the jury, proves that they were all paid by plaintiff; which is sufficient, though a receipt for the money was not endorsed on the bills, and though they were not endorsed in blank by the holders, to whom the money was paid.

The plaintiffs obtained a verdict.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
18 F. Cas. 1022, 2 Wash. C. C. 96, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/palmer-v-blight-circtdpa-1807.