Philips v. M'Curdy
This text of 1 H. & J. 187 (Philips v. M'Curdy) 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.
Opinion
The Court are of opinion, and so direct the jury, that the defendant is not responsible to the plaintiffs, owing to their laches in not giving him reasonable notice of the bill of exchange-being protested for nonacceptance, and in not having presented the said bill for payment, and protested it for nonpayment at the time required by law; and because Caspar Voght, the drawee, being the holder of the bill, could not legally protest the same. The plaintiffs excepted, and suffered a nonsuit.
Duvall and Done, J. concurring.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 H. & J. 187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/philips-v-mcurdy-vagensess-1801.