Townsend v. Billinge

New York Court of Common Pleas

Townsend v. Billinge

1 Hilt. 353

DecidedJune 15, 1857

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Hilt. 353 (Townsend v. Billinge) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Common Pleas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Townsend v. Billinge, 1 Hilt. 353 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1857).

Pincite

Opinion

Daly, J. —

The check was payable to bearer, and was therefore transferable by delivery. The answer merely averred that the plaintiff was not the lawful holder or owner, and the production of the check upon the trial, in the possession of the plaintiff, was prima facie evidence of transfer and title. It was proved that the check was signed on the 6th of Nov., 1856, and admitted by the answer that the defendants were then partners.

The plaintiff was entitled to recover, and the judgment should be affirmed. James v. Chalmers, 2 Selden, 209 and 214.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Daly, J. —

The check was payable to bearer, and was therefore transferable by delivery. The answer merely averred that the plaintiff was not the lawful holder or owner, and the production of the check upon the trial, in the possession of the plaintiff, was prima facie evidence of transfer and title. It was proved that the check was signed on the 6th of Nov., 1856, and admitted by the answer that the defendants were then partners.

The plaintiff was entitled to recover, and the judgment should be affirmed. James v. Chalmers, 2 Selden, 209 and 214.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Hilt. 353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/townsend-v-billinge-nyctcompl-1857.