Welton v. Peerce

5 W. Va. 437
CourtWest Virginia Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 15, 1872
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 5 W. Va. 437 (Welton v. Peerce) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering West Virginia Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Welton v. Peerce, 5 W. Va. 437 (W. Va. 1872).

Opinion

Maxwell J.

The appellant has wholly failed to show any .error to his prejudice in the decree complained of.

The negotiable note of Welton, in which Peerce and Williams were endorsers, was fully paid off by Peerce and W ill'iams on the 7th day of June, 1860, by the satisfaction of the» judgment then paid by them.

The money to satisfy the judgment seems to have been borrowed on the draft of Peerce, endorsed by Williams, bearing-date June 7th, 1860, and payable six months after date at the-Merchants’ Bank of Baltimore.

The amount of this draft was paid by Peerce at its maturity, and the ri ght at once accrued to Peerce to recover from Wel-ton the entire amount of the negotiable note on which he was, first endorser.

The questions which the appellant attempts to raise in the case do not arise in it. Hogan vs. Duke, 20 Gratt., 244; Michire vs. Jeffries, 21 Grat., 334.

The decree complained of must be affirmed with damages- and costs.

The other judges concurred.

Decree affiRued.

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

Related

Kessel v. Cohen
140 S.E. 15 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1927)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
5 W. Va. 437, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/welton-v-peerce-wva-1872.