Court Opinion

ID: 6580704
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-20 19:38:02.734836+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:57:16.302124
License: Public Domain

The opinion of the court was delivered by
Ross, J.
The only question arising on the exceptions is, whether an averment that the defendants made their promissory note on a specified day, and that the note was payable “ six months ” or “ one year ” after its date, without particularly specifying the date of the note, is good on demurrer. Says Mr. Chitty in his work on Pleadings, vol. 1, 258: “ So in an action on a bill or note, though it be payable at a particular time ‘ after date,’ it is not necessary to describe the instrument as ‘ bearing-date ’ on a given day ; it suffices to state that ‘ heretofore, to wit, on, &c.,’ it was made, &c.; and the court said they would intend that the date of the instrument was the day on which it was alleged to have been made ” ; citing 6 M. & S. 75. The authority is satisfactory, and in accordance with the ordinary and plain meaning of the language employed.
Judgment affirmed.-