Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Theodore M. Davis, as Receiver, etc., Respondent, v. William Duryea, Appellant, 1876 — 67 N.Y. 586 · caselaw · US
General
Theodore M. Davis, as Receiver, etc., Respondent, v. William Duryea, Appellant
67 N.Y. 586·New York Court of Appeals·1876·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Theodore M. Davis, as Receiver, etc., Respondent, v. William Duryea, Appellant.
(Argued September 27, 1876;
decided October 6, 1876.)
This action was upon a bond similar to that in I)mis v. Gopela/nd (ante, p. 127), save that the limitation as to time was that the obligee should not be liable for any discounts made, etc., “ or any other matters or things transpiring after the expiration of one year from the date ” of the bond. Held, as in that case, that paper discounted before the expiration of the year, but not maturing until thereafter, was included.
Joseph J. Marrin for the appellant.
George E. Sibley for the respondent.
[MAJORITY — Miller, J.,]
Miller, J.,
reads for affirmance.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.