Stoughton v. Swan

4 Cal. 213
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 15, 1854
StatusPublished

This text of 4 Cal. 213 (Stoughton v. Swan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Stoughton v. Swan, 4 Cal. 213 (Cal. 1854).

Opinion

Mr. Ch. J. Murray

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Mr. J. Heydeneeldt concurred.

No precise words or particular form is required in the notice to be given to the indorser of a promissory note or bill of exchange, of its dishonor.

It is sufficient if it appears, or can reasonably be inferred * from the notice, that the note or bill has [214] been duly presented for payment, and has been dishonored.

A notice that a note had been duly presented, etc'., and protested for non-payment, and that the holder looked to the indorser for payment of the same, is sufficient to put the indorser upon inquiry, which is all the law requires, and answers fully the reason and purpose of notice. The word protested has a definite legal signification, which should have been recognized by the Court below. In this case, the notice of protest was sufficient.

Judgment reversed with costs.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 Cal. 213, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stoughton-v-swan-cal-1854.