¶1It has long been settled in this state, that in a suit upon a note in the name of an endorsee against the maker, the latter may conclude a plea of usury with an offer to verify it by his own oath ; and that the endorsee may reply that there has been no illegal interest secured or taken, and conclude with aa offer to verify the replication by the oath of the payee. But by the express letter of the statute, a defendant can, in these cases, verify his plea by his own oath, only when the payee of the note is alive. When the suit is in the name of the payee it appears by the record that the payee is alive. But when the suit is in the name of an endorsee it cannot appear, that the payee is alive without an averment of the fact, and we are of opinion that the plea in this case must be adjudged insufficient for the want of such an averment.
5 N.H. 151
Plummer v. Drake
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Decided January 15, 1830
Superior Court of New Hampshire · decided 1830-01-15
Assumpsit upon anote for $162,84, dated February25, 1824, made by the defendant and payable to Abraham Tilton, or order, on demand with interest, and by Tilton endorsed to the plaintiff.
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 1861
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1830-01-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →