Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

12 Johns. 17

Graves v. Dash

Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors

Decided April 15, 1814

Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · decided 1814-04-15

DASH brought an action of assumpsit in the supreme court, as first endorsee of a bill of exchange, against Graves, as ibo endorser. The bill was drawn at New-York, the 18th of Jonuary, 1811, on Worrall 8c Williamson, at Liverpool in England, for 7871. 18s. 2d. sterling, payable sixty days after sight, and was duly protested for non-acceptance and non-payment. The cause was tried at the New-York sittings in November, 1813, before the Chief Justice.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 1808

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1814-04-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Lewis, Senator,

¶1was of opinion, that the judgment of the

¶2supreme court ought to be reversed, and delivered his reasons at length, but which the reporter regrets he is unable to state.

¶3Wilkin, Senator, declared himself to be of the same opinion.

Sanford, Senator.

¶4After the fullest deliberation which I have been able to bestow on this cause, I am of opinion that the judgment of the supreme court was right. It is highly expedient that the amount to be recovered on dishonoured bills of exchange should be determined by a certain and uniform rule ; and such is the rule adopted, and settled by the supreme court. They have rightly determined, that in this, as in other cases of contracts, the rule by which the amount or extent of redress should he ascertained, is a question of law. I forbear to discuss the several rules which have been proposed, or to comment on the arguments which have been urged in support of them. I mean, merely, to state my own conclusion, and to express my approbation of the rule adopted by the supreme court. My opinion, therefore, is, that the judgment below ought to be affirmed.

¶5P. W. Radcliff, Senator, declared himself of the same opinion.

¶6Yates, Senator, concurred.

Van Buren, Senator,

¶7declared himself to be of the same opinion. He thought it safest to affirm the judgment of the supreme . *24coürt, and if the rule adopted by that court was found to be really inconvenient or wrong, the.legislature ought to regulate the mode of settling protested bills, by statute.

¶8' ' ( Wendell, Bishop, Hager, Stewart, Townsend, and Vanbeyck, Senators, concurred.

¶9Elmendorf, Senator, was of opinion, that the judgment of the supreme court ought to be reversed. ■

¶10Hubbard, Blqodgood, Atwater, Bloom, Clarke, Keyes, Tabor, and House, Senators, were, also, of the same opinion. -

¶11A majority* of the members of the court being of that opinion, it was, therefore, ordered and adjudged, that the judgment of the supreme court be reversed, ' &c.; and that the said John B. Graves recover his costs, &c. And the record be remitted, &c.

¶12Judgment of reversal

¶13 April 1, 1814. For affirming, 10. For reversing, 11.

/12/johns/17 · .json · Public domain