Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

4 Cal. 29

Toothaker v. Cornwall

California Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1854

California Supreme Court · decided 1854-01-15

The plaintiff brought suit against Pierre B. Cornwall, as indorser of a promissory note, drawn by Barton Lee, dated Sacramento, November 8th, 1850, for the sum of $500, and payable to the order of said Cornwall, on the 1st day of July, 1851, with interest, at the rate of one per cent, per month.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 1863

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1854-01-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Mr. Justice Heydenfet/dt

¶1delivered the opinion of the Court.

Mr. Ch. J. Murray concurred.

¶2If a note is payable in' bank, notice of non-payment may be given to the indorser, on the evening of the day on which the note is payable, after the close of banking hours, and such notice will not be premature, because it is commercially dishonored, if not paid within those hours.

¶3As to a note not payable in bank, notice may be given on the evening of the day it is payable, at the close of the usual hours of commercial business; and, in places where there are no regular hours of business, the notice may be given after sunset.

¶4*31In this case, the record discloses that the notice was given at from 4 to 4-¿- o’clock P. M., of the day on which the note was payable. It does not show, however, that the time specified was after the expiration of the usual hours of business, and we necessarily know that, in midsummer, the hour named was far from sunset.

¶5The proof is, therefore, insufficient to make out proper notice.

¶6Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.

/4/cal/29 · .json · Public domain