Corp v. M'Comb

Decided April 15, 1800

New York Supreme Court · decided 1800-04-15

This was an action by the plaintiff, as the endorsee .of a promissory note, against the defendant as the endorser. A verdict having been obtained by the plaintiff, a motion was made in arrest of judgment, on the grounds, that it was stated in the declaration that the notice to the endorser was given on the same day on which the demand was made of the maker, but after such' demand and a default of payment by the maker.

Decided 1800-04-15

*Per Curiam.

¶1Notice to the endorsee on the third [*329] day of grace, after a demand made of the maker, and his default of payment, is good. Its being earlier than is required, cannot form an objection on the part of the endorser.

¶2Rule refused.(a)

¶3 “ In general it may be said that notice may be given to the endorsers personally, (where that is the proper mode,) on the same day that the dishonor takes place after that event has happened : and by mail of the same day, if that is the proper mode of giving notice.” Story on Bills, 451, § 382. Bussard v. Levering, 6 Wheat. R. 102; Lindenberger v. Beall, id. 104; Shed v. Brett, 1 Pick. 401; Burbridge v. Manners, 3 Campb. 193; Ex parte Maline, 19 Vesey, 216. Chitty on Bills, Ch. 10, 512-514, (8th ed. 1833.) 3 Kent Comm. 104—109, 4th ed.