Stewart v. Anderson
Decision Date | 01 February 1810 |
Citation | 3 L.Ed. 199,10 U.S. 203,6 Cranch 203 |
Parties | STEWART v. ANDERSON |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
ERROR to the circuit court for the district of Columbia.
Stewart, the endorsee of a promissory note, brought his action of debt, under the statute of Virginia, against Anderson, the maker. The note was made payable to W. Hodgson, and by him assigned to Stewart. It was dated the 25th of April, 1807, and payable 180 days after date, for 330 dollars and 56 cents.
The defendant pleaded,
1. Nil debet; and.
2. That at the time the note became due, and before the defendant had notice of the assignment thereof to the plaintiff by W. Hodgson, the latter became, and now is, indebted to the defendant in the sum of 566 dollars and 67 cents, by note dated the 29th of June, 1807, and payable 60 days after its date. That the defendant has been, and still is, ready and doth offer to set off against the money due from him by the note mentioned in the declaration, so much of the 566 dollars and 67 cents, as will be and is sufficient to discharge all that is due and owing from him for and on account of the note in the declaration mentioned.
Upon the trial in the court below the jury found a special verdict, which states, that Hodgson transferred to the plaintiff the note in the declaration mentioned; and afterwards, on the 14th of August, 1807, for the first time informed the defendant that the note was transferred, but did not say to whom. At the time of that information, the defendant held a note of W. Hodgson, dated the 29th of June, 1807, for 566 dollars and 67 cents which was given for a full and valuable consideration, and payable 60 days after date. When the defendant was informed of the transfer of the note he made no reply. The jury finally conclude by saying that they &c.
Upon this special verdict the judgment of the court below was for the defendant; and the plaintiff brought his writ of error.
Youngs, for the...
To continue reading
Request your trial- De Rodulfa v. United States
-
Curran v. Owens.
...30 Conn. 149; 4 W. Va. 456; Code W. Va. ch. 166; 1 Mich. 150; 6 Shepley (Me.) 109; 61 111. 31; 14 111. 334; 5 Rand. 657; 5 Craneh 281; 6 Cranch 203; 7 Wall. 454; 26 Me. 453; 53 Me. 496; 34 Me. 14; 36 Me. 62; 11 111. 619; 1 Binn. 601; 1 N. H. 61; 32 N. H. 410; 1 Neb. 419; 3 Serg. & R, 590; 4......
-
Stebbins & Lawson v. Bruce
... ... seem to be in conflict with the decision of the Supreme Court ... of the United States in Stewart v. Anderson, 6 ... Cranch 203. In that case an action was brought, under the ... statute of Virginia, by the indorsers of a promissory note ... ...
- Atkinson v. the Mutual Assurance Society Against Fire, On Buildings of the State of Virginia