Smith v. Segar

Decided March 22, 1809

Supreme Court of Virginia · decided 1809-03-22

The appellant brought an action of debt against the appellee, in the County Court of King and Queen, for 980 dollars and 67 cents; and declared that the defendant (now appellee) being indebted to a certain John P. Saunderson, in that sum, the said Saunderson, on the 6th of November, 1797, made his request in writing, directed to the defendant, requiring him to pay the amount to the plaintiff (now appellant) or order, at sixty days after date, which request being afterwards…

Relies on Pacific Cable Construction Co. v. McNatt

Decided 1809-03-22

[JUDGE! ROAKE-

¶1Was not that doctrine touched on in Machie’s executor v. Davis, (h) in which it was said that case would lie by the payee against the acceptor of a bill of exchange, on the custom of merchants only? In Hooe v. Wilson, and Dunlap v. Triplett, (i) the authority of Chitty was relied on, but overruled.]

¶2Randolph, for the appellee, cited Espi-nasse’s N. P. 173, to shew that an action of debt would not lie against the acceptor of a bill of exchange, and was proceeding in his argument, when he was stopped by the Court, who intimated that it was unnecessary to discuss the point any further.

¶3Friday, March 28. By the whole Court, the judgment of the District Court was affirmed.

¶42 Wash. 219.

¶5 MS.