Patton v. Wilmot

General Court of Virginia

Patton v. Wilmot

1 H. & J. 477

General Court of Virginia·Decided April 15, 1804·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Chase, Ch. J.

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

Chase, Ch. J.

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.

Patton v. Wilmot, 1 H. & J. 477 (Va. Super. Ct. 1804).

Pincite

1 H. & J. 477 (Patton v. Wilmot) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related