Bank of North America v. Wycoff

Bank of North America v. Wycoff. Notice of nonpayment.— Witness. The indorser of a promissory note must receive notice, within a reasonable time, of the non-payment of the note by the maker. An executor, who is entitled to a share in the residuum of his testator’s estate, which is interested in the suit, is not a competent witness to prove such notice, although the objection appear on his cross-examination. Case, by the indorsee against the payee and indorser of a promissory note, made by Joseph Harrison. The question was, whether the defendant had received notice within a reasonable time, of the non-payment of the note by the maker? Jacob Lawerswyler, the runner of the bank, was called as a witness, to prove the notice ; but after a long examination in chief, he stated on Ms cross-examination, “that he was the executor of Jacob Winney, a stockholder in the bank of North America; and was entitled to a share in the residuum of the testator’s estate.” *The defendant’s counsel then objected to the competency of the witness, on account of his Mterest in the bank. They insisted, that although this appeared after a cross-examination, it was sufficient for the rejection of his evidence altogether; and that, consequently, as there was no proof of notice, independent of his evidence, the plaintiff must be non-suited. s. c. 2 Yeates 39. [MAJORITY] The Court concurring, clearly and explicitly, in the opinion of the defendant’s counsel, The plaintiff suffered a nonsuit.