Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Volume 3
Article 1
Issue 3 March 1918
Recommended Citation
Francis M. Burdick, Real and Personal Defenses in Actions on Negotiable Paper, 3 Cornell L. Rev. 171 (1918)
Available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol3/iss3/1
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for
inclusion in Cornell Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please
contact jmp8@cornell.edu.
The Cornell Law Quarterly
Volume III MARCH, 1918 Number 3
19
2 0Crawford'sAnnotated Negotiable Instruments Law (4th ed.), 46.
1Schaeffer v. Marsh, 90 Misc. (N. Y.) 307 (I915); Linick v. Nutting, 14o App.
Div. (N. Y.) 265 (i9io); Angus v. Downs, 85 Wash. 75 (i9x5), L. R. A. 1915E
351, and note.
2nThe English statute, (sec. 21), uses "conclusively presumed" instead of
"estopped", because the latter term was not known to Scotch law, and our
statute
22 copies the language of the English act.
Ewart on Estoppel, 456-467.
nEwart on Estoppel, 404, quoting from Crane v. London Dock Co., 5 B. & S.
313, 318 (1864), that the law as to market overt "was established for the protec-
tion of buyers, that, if a man did not pursue his goods to market where such goods
were openly sold, he ought not to interfere with the right of the honest and bona fide
purchaser."
2Burdick's Law of Sales (3d ed.), 197. The suggestion of Mr. Pease (8 Col.
L. Rev. 375), that the law merchant treated chattels sold at public markets and
fairs, as "negotiable" is not sustained by the authorities.
REAL AND PERSONAL DEFENSES
40Bowers v. Hurd, io Mass. 427 (1813); Livingston v. Hastie, 2 Caines (N. Y.)
246 (1804).
alHill v. Buckminster, 22 Mass. (5Pick.) 391 (1827); Pearson v. Pearson, 7
Johns. (N. Y.) 26 (181o). In Hill v. Buckminster, Parker, J., who wrote the dic-
tum in Bowers v. Hurd, said: "A negotiable promissory note given for a debt
is with us evidence of payment of the debt, but where there was no previous debt
or demand, the note given is nudum pactum. In coming to this conclusion we
undoubtedly overrule some expressions in the opinion as reported in the case of
Bowers v. Herd, though the case itself was rightly decided upon other principles.
* * * * Further opportunity to examine the cases has convinced us that the
opmion so expressed is untenable; there being cases in the English and other books
which are cases clearly of defense founded upon no consideration, rather than a
failure of one once existing."
2In re Kern's Estate, 171 Pa. 55 (x895); authorities cited in 37 Am. L. Reg.
350.