Robbins v. Dillaye

Decided June 15, 1866

New York Court of Appeals · decided 1866-06-15

Amos and Eli Robbins sued Stephen D. and H. A. Dillaye, in the supreme court, on promissory notes made by Stephen, and indorsed by H. A. Dillaye; to S. Leland & Co. The maker, a resident of Syracuse, N. Y., applied to the Lelands, of New York city, for a loan, and it was agreed between them that the Lelands should discount his notes, paying him the amount, however, in bills of the Valley Bank of Hagerstown, Md., in which they were interested, and from which they obtained the…

Relies on Stuart v. President, Directors & Co. of the Mechanics' & Farmers' Bank · President of the Bank of Utica v. Wager · Thomas v. . Murray

Decided 1866-06-15

¶1The Court affirmed the order,

Davies, Ch. J.,

¶2citing Stuart v. Mechanics’ & Farmers’ Bank, 19 Johns. 496, as decisive in favor of the plaintiffs’ position that the question should have been submitted to the jury. See also Bank of Utica v. Wager, 2 Cow. 712, 769; Flower v. Edwards, Couip. 112; Auriol v. Thomas, 2 Term R. 52; Winch v. Fenn, Id. note c. And in this the other judges concurred, except Peckham, J.,—who was of opinion that the case was distinguishable from Stuart *73v. Mechanics’ & Farmers’ Bank (above), and from Thomas v. Murray, 32 N. Y. 605,—and except J. C. Smith and Mokgah, JJ., who did not vote.

¶3Order affirmed, and judgment absolute for plaintiffs, with direction that the supreme court ascertain and render judgment for damages, with costs.