Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

26 Mass. 39

Phillips v. Ford

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided October 15, 1829

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1829-10-15

<p>Where a promissory note was signed by the defendant and one A., and A. gave in renewal of it a note in which the name of the defendant was forged, and a suit was brought upon the forged note, and the plaintiff gave in evidence declarations and admissions of the defendant tending to show an adoption of this note and to take it out of the statute of limitations, in one of which declarations he spoke of the suit’s having been commenced, it was held, that the service of the writ did not raise a presumption that the declarations related to the new note lather than the old one, without evidence that the defendant had knowledge of the new one or of the contents of the writ; and that the burden was on the plaintiff to prove such knowledge; and that it was proper for the jury to determine upon the whole evidence, to which of the notes the declarations and admissions related.</p>

Decided 1829-10-15

Per Curiam.

¶1The instruction was correct, that the jury were at liberty to apply the declarations or admissions to the old rather than the new note.

¶2The instruction in regard to the burden of proof, was likewise correct. The summons left with the defendant 'does not contain a notice of the particular cause of action, and there was no evidence of his having seen a copy of the writ. The note in suit was proved to have been forged, and the burden was on the plaintiff to show that the defendant had become liable by adopting it.

¶3 Judgment according to verdict.

/26/mass/39 · .json · Public domain