Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

4 Blackf. 417

Fosdick v. Starbuck

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided December 2, 1837

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1837-12-02

Relies on Howell v. Wilson

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1837-12-02

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently May 1875

6 state decisions

4018371840185018601870decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1THE assignee of a promissory note, given without consideration, may sue the assignor at any time, and without having previously sued the maker. Howell v. Wilson, 2 Blackf. 418.

¶2The maker of a promissory note is a competent, witness for the plaintiff, in an action by the assignee against the assignor, involving the validity of the consideration of the note.

¶3The statute requiring an oath to a plea, replication, &c., denying the execution of an instrument of writing, &c., does not dispense with the production of the instrument on the trial: it only excuses proof of the execution of the instrument, when such plea, &c. is without oath.

/4/blackf/417 · .json · Public domain