Case Name: The Anchor Brewing Co., App'lt, v. Charlotte McDonald, Impl'd, Resp't
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1892-02-08
Citations: 44 N.Y. St. Rep. 274
Docket Number: 
Parties: The Anchor Brewing Co., App’lt, v. Charlotte McDonald, Impl’d, Resp’t.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 44
Pages: 274–275

Head Matter:
The Anchor Brewing Co., App’lt, v. Charlotte McDonald, Impl’d, Resp’t.
(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department,
Filed February 8, 1892.)
Bills Ann sates—Protest.
In an action against the endorser of a note, where the only proof of notice to her was that a letter had been written to her two or three days after the note was due, Held.Qioi there was no proof of sufficient notice to charge her, and that a nonsuit was properly granted.
Appeal from judgment dismissing the complaint as against the defendant McDonald.
Action upon a promissory note made by F. M. May and endorsed by Charlotte McDonald.
William Q-. Valentine, for app’lt; Wood & Morschauser, for resp’t.

Opinion:
Pratt, J.
The notarial protest is only evidence of the facts therein stated. It does not state that any notice was sent to the endorser, McDonald. The only proof made upon the trial of .any notice to the endorser was the testimony of a witness at folio 42 that he sent her a letter two or three days after the note was due. The contents of the letter are not shown.
Mo proof being given of sufficient notice, the nonsuit was properly granted.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.
Barnard, P. J., concurs; Dykman, J., not sitting.