Van Winkle v. Ketcham
3 Cai. Cas. 323
Opinion
THE court decided in this cause,hhat the promissory note of an infant, carrying on trade as an adult, could not be enforced against him by the payee, who had taken it . . r i . , ' , . , - r m the course or business,- without knowing tne d ant’s nonage.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Van Winkle v. Ketcham, 3 Cai. Cas. 323 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1805).
3 Cai. Cas. 323 (Van Winkle v. Ketcham) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Benson v. Commissioner
9 B.T.A. 279 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1927)
Casey v. Kastel
119 Misc. 116 (New York Supreme Court, 1922)
Hovey v. Hobson
53 Me. 451 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1866)