Patton v. Wilmot
1 H. & J. 477
This text of 1 H. & J. 477 (Patton v. Wilmot) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering General Court of Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Patton v. Wilmot, 1 H. & J. 477 (Va. Super. Ct. 1804).
Opinion
There has not been due diligence used to recover the money from the drawer of the note, and it is the province of the court to determine whether or not dup diligence has been used. The jury therefore must find their verdict for the defendant, unless it appears to them that the defendant has subsequently promised to pay the amount of the note to the indorsee,
Yesdict eos the Defendant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Staylor v. Ball
24 Md. 183 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1866)
Ewalt v. Harding
16 Md. 160 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1860)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
1 H. & J. 477, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patton-v-wilmot-vagensess-1804.