Case ID: dc_3/html/0173-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bank of United States v. Daniel Bussard.
    In an action against the maker of a promissory note, it is not necessary to show a demand of payment at the bank in which it is made payable.
    Assumpsit against the maker of a promissory note, to the order of William King, for $10,255, for value received, “ negotiable and payable at the Bank of Columbia.”
    Judgment was confessed, subject to the opinion of the Court, whether the plaintiffs could maintain the action without averring and proving demand of payment at the Bank of Columbia.
    
      Mr. Lear, for the plaintiffs,
    cited The Bank of the United States v. Smith, 11 Wheat. 171.
    
      Mr. G. C Lee, for the defendant,
    cited Beverley v. Beverley, in this Court, at Alexandria, (2 Cranch, C. C. 470,) not then decided; and jRowe v. Young, 2 Brod. & Bing. 165; S. C. in Error, 2 Bligh, 391.
   The Court (Cranch, C. J., doubting,) decided that it was not necessary for the plaintiffs to aver or prove a demand of payment at the Bank of Columbia, in this action against the maker.