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.
Jay Pettibone, Appellant, v. Abel S. Blackmar, Respondent, 1872 — 48 N.Y. 689 · caselaw · US
General
Jay Pettibone, Appellant, v. Abel S. Blackmar, Respondent
48 N.Y. 689·New York Commission of Appeals·1872·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
Jay Pettibone, Appellant, v. Abel S. Blackmar, Respondent.
(Argued January 10, 1872;
decided May term, 1872.)
C., being the owner of thirty shares of the stock of the Third Rational Bank of Buffalo, sold the same to plaintiff. The by-laws of the bank contained a provision that no, transfer of its stock should be made, without the consent of the board of directors, by a stockholder who was liable to the bank in any manner, and that such liability should be a lien upon the stock. A notice of this provision was contained in the certificate assigned to plaintiff. Plaintiff applied to the bank to have the stock transferred to him upon its books. At that time the bank held a note of C., upon which defendant, who was president of the bank, was accommodation indorser. The bank refused to make the transfer unless the note was paid, and refused to deliver it as a subsisting claim against the indorser. Plaintiff paid the amount of the note and accepted the same from the bank, with the indorsement erased, and a receipt of payment in full written thereon, and the stock was thereupon transferred. Held, that the acceptance was an acquiescence by plaintiff in the claim of the bank, that the note should be paid and defendant’s liability as indorser discharged, and that an action could not be maintained against him thereon.
Williojin H. Greene for appellant.
John Ganson for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Lott, Ch. 0., reads for affirmance.
Leonard, C., reads for reversal.
All concur for affirmance, except Leonard, C., dissenting.
Order affirmed, and judgment absolute against plaintiff, With costs.