Case Name: Small v. Bladworth et al.
Court: New York City Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1892-10-24
Citations: 20 N.Y.S. 663
Docket Number: 
Parties: Small v. Bladworth et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 20
Pages: 663–663

Head Matter:
Small v. Bladworth et al.
(City Court of New York, General Term.
October 24, 1892.)
Negotiable Instruments—Joint Makers.
In an action on a promissory note "the question whether the joint makers are partners or not is immaterial.
. Appeal from trial term.
Action by Rufus Small against George H. Bladworth and J. Dana Jones on a promissory note. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendants appeal. Affirmed.
Argued before Van Wyck and McCabthy, JJ.
J. Dana Jones, for appellants. A. G. Vanderpoel, for respondent.

Opinion:
McCarthy, J.
This action is on a promissory note against the defendants as makers, and presents a simple question of fact. It was fairly submitted to the jury, and they found a verdict against the defendants. If the defendants made the note, it is immaterial whether they made it as partners, or were doing business in some other'manner. Once shown that the note was made by them, they are liable. The learned justice was therefore right in declining to charge as requested. The judge committed no error, and the judgment should be affirmed, with costs.