Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1867

Dudley v. Wells

Dudley v. Wells
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Decided July 1, 1867 · Appleton, Barrows, Cutting, Dickerson, Taplev, Walton
55 Me. 145
Dudley v. Wells

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Appleton, C. J.

By the Act of Congress of March 3, 1865, a draft or note is declared "invalid and of no effect” when there is an "intent to evade the provisions of this Act.” To authorize the Court to declare an unstamped instrument void, there must be an intent to evade the law. Whether there was such an intent or not is not made to appear. The inquiry is not made of the trustee, nor is there any proof on the subject. The note is not shown to be absolutely " invalid and of no effect.” Hitchcock v. Sawyer, 39 Vermont, 413; Tobey v. Chipman, 13 Allen, 123; Govern v. Littlefield, 13 Allen, 127; Willey v. Robinson, 13 Allen, 128; McGovern v. Hoesback, 53 Penn. State Rep., 177. Exceptions overruled.

Cutting, Walton, Dickerson, Barrows and Taplev, JJ., concurred.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.