Wendell v. President, Directors & Co. of Washington & Warren Bank

New York Supreme Court

Wendell v. President, Directors & Co. of Washington & Warren Bank

5 Cow. 161

DecidedOctober 15, 1825

StatusPublished

This text of 5 Cow. 161 (Wendell v. President, Directors & Co. of Washington & Warren Bank) 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

Wendell v. President, Directors & Co. of Washington & Warren Bank, 5 Cow. 161 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1825).

Pincite

Opinion

Curia, per Savage, Ch. Justice.

The section in question provides, that the defendants shall be liable to pay for all notes, bills, &c. the payment of which shall have been demanded, as the bills in this case were, and which shall not have been paid in specie, damages at the rate of' 10 per cent, per annum, until they shall be paid or otherwise satisfied. I think the legislature intended this 10 per cent, as an addition to the sun; of principal and interest which was already recoverable at law. They intended this, by way of punishment to the defendants, and compensation to the plaintiff, for his loss and disappointment. There is certainly some analogy between this case, and that of protested foreign bills of exchange, upon which the drawer is bound to pay, not only interest and 20 per cent, damages, (4 John. 119.) but the difference of exchange. (12 id. 17.) The plaintiff.must have judgment for $336, over and above what has been paid into Court.

Judgment accordingly,

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

Curia, per Savage, Ch. Justice.

The section in question provides, that the defendants shall be liable to pay for all notes, bills, &c. the payment of which shall have been demanded, as the bills in this case were, and which shall not have been paid in specie, damages at the rate of' 10 per cent, per annum, until they shall be paid or otherwise satisfied. I think the legislature intended this 10 per cent, as an addition to the sun; of principal and interest which was already recoverable at law. They intended this, by way of punishment to the defendants, and compensation to the plaintiff, for his loss and disappointment. There is certainly some analogy between this case, and that of protested foreign bills of exchange, upon which the drawer is bound to pay, not only interest and 20 per cent, damages, (4 John. 119.) but the difference of exchange. (12 id. 17.) The plaintiff.must have judgment for $336, over and above what has been paid into Court.

Judgment accordingly,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 Cow. 161, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wendell-v-president-directors-co-of-washington-warren-bank-nysupct-1825.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack