Stow v. Wadley

New York Supreme Court

Stow v. Wadley

8 Johns. 124

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMay 15, 1811

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 8 Johns. 124 (Stow v. Wadley) 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

Stow v. Wadley, 8 Johns. 124 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1811).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The case shows that there was no consideration fo*r the note. Ten Eyck declined to act, and would not receive the parol evidence that the defendant offered. The defendant was not in default, and his default, or a decision of Ten Eyck against him, was a condition precedent to the validity and binding,operation of the note. The verdict ought to be set aside, and a new trial awarded, with costs, to abide the event.

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

Per Curiam.

The case shows that there was no consideration fo*r the note. Ten Eyck declined to act, and would not receive the parol evidence that the defendant offered. The defendant was not in default, and his default, or a decision of Ten Eyck against him, was a condition precedent to the validity and binding,operation of the note. The verdict ought to be set aside, and a new trial awarded, with costs, to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 Johns. 124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stow-v-wadley-nysupct-1811.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack