¶1If the note in suit was given for the accommodation of Dowden, (and we think the jury might reasonably have drawn that conclusion from the testimony,) he cannot recover upon it. Whether the note was an accommodation note, or whether it was given because the defendants did not dispute their legal liability upon the former note that was signed in their names by La Large, is the question that ought to have been submitted to the the jury. It was, in our opinion, an error to direct a verdict. There is no question of usury in the case. Judgment reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.
2 N.Y.S. 161
Dowden v. Calvin
New York Court of Common Pleas
Decided June 28, 1888
New York Court of Common Pleas · decided 1888-06-28
Action on a promissory note, brought by George A. Dowden against John Calvin and Thomas Wright. The court directed a verdict for plaintiff, and defendants appeal.
Decided 1888-06-28