Case ID: ny-sup-ct_10/html/0548-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JAMES E. BRUCE, Appellant, v. JOHN C. WRIGHT, Respondent.
    
    
      Indorser and indorsee—contraet between—intention gathered from what.
    
    If there be a written or verbal agreement between an indorser and his immediate indorsee, that the indorsee shall not sue the indorser, it is a good defense against the indorsee’s suing in breach of his agreement. The contract between the indorser and indorsee consists partly in the written indorsement, partly in the delivery of the bill to the indorsee, and partly in the actual understanding and intention with which the delivery was made.
    The intention of the parties may be gathered from the words of the parties, either spoken or written; from the usage of the place or of trade; from the course of dealing between the parties, or from their relative situations.
    
      Benton v. Martin (53 IT. Y., 570); Prentiss v. Graves (88 Barb., 631); Ocean -Bank v. Bill (89 id., 577).
    Appeal from a judgment in favor of defendant, and from an order denying a new trial.
    
      Cornelius E. Stephens, for the appellant.
    
      Henry E. Turner, for the respondent.
    
      
       This cause was decided at the October Term, but the opinion was not received in time to be published with the decisions of that term.
    
    
      
       Byles on Bills, p. 147.
    
   Opinion by Mu.llin, P. J.

Judgment affirmed.