Citation network
Wallace Vs. Mcconnell
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 01, 1839
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 136 (1839) U.S. Supreme Court Wallace v. McConnellSearch
-
U.S. 13 Pet. 136 136 (1839) Wallace v. McConnellSearch
-
of a promissory note, never has received the direct decision of this Court. In the case of Bank of the United States v. SmithSearch
-
that the question in such case may perhaps be considered at rest in England by the decision of the late case of Rowe v. YoungSearch
-
The question now before the Court cannot, certainly, be considered as decided by the case of Bank of the United States v. SmithSearch
-
of the English courts on the question, and that opinions, contrary to that of the House of Lords in the case of Rowe v. YoungSearch
-
taken and laid before the House of Lords, and will be found reported in an appendix to the report of the case of Rowe v. YoungSearch
-
the maker of a promissory note, and the place of payment designated in the body of the note. The case of Nichols v. BowesSearch
-
that he was afraid to admit such evidence, lest doubts should arise as to its necessity. And in the case of Wild v. RenwardsSearch
-
the maker there is no necessity for proving that it was presented there for payment. The case of Saunderson v. BowesSearch
-
note and a bill of exchange, as both he and Mr. Justice Bayley had a very short time before, in the cases of Nichols v. BowesSearch
-
and Wild v. RenwardsSearch
-
not being due until demanded. Thus we see that until the late decision in the House of Lords in the case of Rowe v. YoungSearch
-
This question came before the supreme court of the State of New York in the year 1809 in the case of Foden & Slater v. SharpSearch
-
with respect Page 38 U. S. 148 to a demand of payment at the place designated. And in the case of Wolcott v. VanSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
in delivering the opinion of the court, observed that the question had been already decided in the case of Foden v. SharpSearch
-
of a note does to the endorsee. He is the principal, and not a collateral debtor. And in the case of Caldwell v. CassadySearch
-
the court said this case has been already decided by this court in the case of Wolcott v. VanSearch
-
money, it was matter of defense to be pleaded and proved on his part. Page 38 U. S. 149 The case of Watkins v. CrouchSearch
-
and he examined the case of Sanderson v. BowesSearch
-
on demand at a specified place. The same doctrine was held by the Court of Appeals of Maryland in the case of Bowie v. DuvallSearch
-
Gill & Johnson 175, and the New York cases, as well as that of Bank of the United States v. SmithSearch
-
to receive it, which defense generally will be in bar of damages only, and not in bar of the debt. The case of Ruggles v. PattonSearch
-
action or promise to pay money. So also in the State of New Jersey the same rule is adopted. In the case of Weed v. HoutenSearch
-
The same rule has been fully established by the Supreme Court of Tennessee in the cases of McNairy v. BellSearch
-
and Mulhovin v. HannumSearch
-
Bussard v. MarshallSearch
-
Wheat. 216, and also in the case of Beaston v. Farmers'Search
-
if that matter be determined against you, it is a confession of the matter in issue. This rule was adopted in Kimball v. HuntingtonSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Wallace v. McConnellSearch
-
of Bank of the United States v. SmithSearch
-
of Rowe v. YoungSearch
-
of Nichols v. BowesSearch
-
of Wild v. RenwardsSearch
-
of Saunderson v. BowesSearch
-
of Foden & Slater v. SharpSearch
-
of Wolcott v. VanSearch
-
of Foden v. SharpSearch
-
of Caldwell v. CassadySearch
-
of Watkins v. CrouchSearch
-
of Sanderson v. BowesSearch
-
of Bowie v. DuvallSearch
-
of Ruggles v. PattonSearch
-
of Weed v. HoutenSearch
-
of McNairy v. BellSearch
-
of Renner & Bussard v. MarshallSearch
-
of Beaston v. Farmers'Search
-
Kimball v. HuntingtonSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial