Robinson v. Clandall

9 Wend. 425
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1832
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 9 Wend. 425 (Robinson v. Clandall) 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
Robinson v. Clandall, 9 Wend. 425 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1832).

Opinion

[426]*426 By the Court,

Sutherland, J.

The motion for a new trial must be denied. The jury have found that the plaintiffs came honestly by the notes on which the suit is brought; that they were not obtained by them fraudulently. That question was distinctly submitted to them by the judge, and they were charged to find for the defendants, if they believed the plaintiffs obtained the possession of the notes fraudulently.

The notes being payable to bearer, and the"payee having died in Pennsylvania, admitting the plaintiffs to have been his administrators there, and in that manner to have obtained the possession of the notes, I sec no legal objection to their maintaining an action upon them in their own names as bearers. As administrators they could not sue here. Letters testamentary, or of administration granted abroad, give no authority to sue here ; we take no notice of them. 1 Johns. Ch. R. 156. 6 id. 353. 7 Cowen, 68, and cases there cited. But being the real owners of the notes, they had a right to declare as bearers and recover in that character. A mere agent, having a note of his principal, payable to bearer, may sue on it in his own name, and it does not lie with the defendant to object the plaintiff’s want of interest. 7 Cowen, 174, and cases there cited. It was not pretended in this case, that the defendants had any set-off or other defence as against the payee.

Motion for new trial denied.

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

Related

American Colonial Bank & Trust Co. v. District Court of San Juan
57 P.R. 557 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1940)
American Colonial Bank & Trust Co. v. Corte de Distrito de San Juan
57 P.R. Dec. 567 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1940)
Valentine v. Duke
222 P. 494 (Washington Supreme Court, 1924)
In re Ancillary Letters of Administration With the Will Annexed of McShane
8 Mills Surr. 277 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1911)
McCully v. Cooper
46 P. 82 (California Supreme Court, 1896)
Wilkins v. Ellett
108 U.S. 256 (Supreme Court, 1883)
Barlow v. Myers
31 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 286 (New York Supreme Court, 1881)
In re Traznier
2 Redf. 171 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1877)
Lucas v. Byrne
35 Md. 485 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1872)
Sanford v. McCreedy
28 Wis. 103 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1871)
Petersen v. . Chemical Bank
32 N.Y. 21 (New York Court of Appeals, 1865)
Robbins v. Wells
18 Abb. Pr. 191 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1863)
Robins v. Wells
26 How. Pr. 15 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1863)
Rogers v. McLean
10 Abb. Pr. 306 (New York Supreme Court, 1860)
Hollister v. Hollister
10 How. Pr. 532 (New York Supreme Court, 1854)
Bright v. Currie
5 Sandf. 433 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1852)
Van Orden's Administrator v. Reynolds
18 Wend. 333 (New York Supreme Court, 1836)
Packer v. Willson
15 Wend. 343 (New York Supreme Court, 1836)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 Wend. 425, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robinson-v-clandall-nysupct-1832.