King v. Hurley

• Decision Date: 25 July 1893
• Citation: 85 Me. 525,27 A. 463
• Parties: KING v. HURLEY.
• Court: Maine Supreme Court

27 A. 463

85 Me. 525

KING

v. HURLEY.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

July 25, 1893.

(Official.)

Exceptions from supreme judicial court, Hancock county.

Action on a promissory note by George E. King against Jerry Hurley. Plaintiff had judgment, and defendant brings exceptions. Exceptions overruled.

A. W. King, for plaintiff.

G. B. Stuart, for defendant.

EMERY, J. This was an action by an indorsee against the indorser of a promissory note. At the maturity of the note, payment was duly demanded of the maker, and was refused, and notice thereof was seasonably sent to the defendant indorser. The defendant makes but two objections to the notice: First, that it did not state who were the other indorsers of the note; second, that it misstated the amount of the note.

The defendant, however, does not show that he was in the least misled or confused by the omission, or by the mistake. On the contrary, it clearly appears that he understood the notice to refer to the note in suit. He was therefore fully informed of the dishonor of this note, and that the holder looked to him for payment. This was sufficient to fix his liability. Bank v. Warden, 1 N. Y. 413.

Exceptions overruled.

LIBBEY, FOSTER, HASKELL. and WHITEHOUSE, JJ., concurred. PETERS, C. J., did not sit.