New York Supreme Court, 1842

Bank of Orleans v. Merrill

Bank of Orleans v. Merrill
New York Supreme Court · Decided January 15, 1842
2 Hill & Den. 295

Counsel

N. Hill, jr. for the defendant., C. M. Jenkins, for the plaintiff.

Bank of Orleans v. Merrill

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The instrument in question is in effect a negotiable promissory note.(a) We cannot sanction it as the basis of a right of recovery, without disregarding the provisions of the statute against the issue of a spurious and illegal currency. The case is within the principle of Safford v. Wyckoff, (1 Hill, 11,) and Smith & Warren v. Strong, (ante, p. 241.) The defendant must have judgment.

Ordered accordingly.

In Ellis and wife v. Mason, (1 Eng. Jurist, 380, Am. ed. Halst. & Voorh.) an instrument in the following form was held to be a promissory note, and to require a stamp

“ 14 Feby. 1836.

John Mason—Borrowed of Mary Ann Mason, his. sister, the sum of fourteen pounds in cash, as per loan, in promise of payment of which I am truly thankful for, and shall never be forgotten by me.

John Mason, your affectionate brother. £14.”

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