Moses Wanzer, Plaintiff in Error v. Tullius C. Tupper and John H. Rollins Book Reviews

Moses Wanzer, Plaintiff in Error v. Tullius C. Tupper and John H. Rollins by United States Supreme Court Book Summary

In this case, the Circuit Court for the Southern District of Mississippi decided, that the holder of an inland bill of exchange drawn and accepted in that state was not entitled to recover against the indorser, unless the bill had been regularly protested for non-payment. This decision was made before the case of Bailey v. Dozier, reported in 6 How., 23, came before this court. In that case the court held, upon full consideration of the question, that, under the statute of Mississippi, the holder of an inland bill of exchange was entitled to recover of an indorser the amount due on the bill, with interest, upon giving the customary proof of default and notice; and that the protest was necessary only for the purpose of enabling him to recover the five per cent. damages given by the act. The case of Bailey v. Dozier must govern this, and the judgment in the Circuit Court is therefore reversed. Order.

👋 Do you love Moses Wanzer, Plaintiff in Error v. Tullius C. Tupper and John H. Rollins books? Please share your friends!

Moses Wanzer, Plaintiff in Error v. Tullius C. Tupper and John H. Rollins (United States Supreme Court) Book Reviews 2024

United States Supreme Court - Moses Wanzer, Plaintiff in Error v. Tullius C. Tupper and John H. Rollins Discussions & Comments

Have you read this book yet? What do you think about Moses Wanzer, Plaintiff in Error v. Tullius C. Tupper and John H. Rollins by United States Supreme Court book? Ask the bookpedia.co community a question about Moses Wanzer, Plaintiff in Error v. Tullius C. Tupper and John H. Rollins!