Anchor Brewing Co. v. McDonald — 17 N.Y.S. 661

Majority

p. 661

Anchor Brewing Co. v. McDonald et al.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.

February 8, 1892.)

Headnote

Negotiable Instruments—Protest—Sufficiency of Evidence.^

In an action against the indorser of a note the protest did not show that notice had been given the indorser, and no evidence of notice to her was offered, except that of a witness, who testified that he sent her a letter two or three days_ after the note was due, but did not state the contents of the letter. Held, that plaintiff was properly nonsuited.

Appeal from circuit court, Westchester county.

Action by the Anchor Brewing Company against Charlotte McDonald and another on a promissory note. From a nonsuit, plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

Argued before Barnard, P. J., and Pratt, J.

William G. Valentine, for appellant. Wood & Morschauser, for respondents.

The notarial protest is only evidence of the facts therein stated. It does not state that any notice was sent to the indorser, McDonald. The only proof made upon the trial of any notice to the indorser was the testimony of a witness that he sent her a letter two or three days after the note was due. The contents of the letter are not shown. Ho proof being given of sufficient notice, the nonsuit was properly granted. Judgment affirmed, with costs.