49 Vt. 390 | Vt. | 1877
The opinion of the court was delivered by
The defendant delivered the note in question in its present form to the plaintiff in part payment of the purchase-money of a farm purchased of the plaintiff. The case shows-that
The transaction discloses a fraud on the part of the defendant. Before the Statute of Limitations had barred the plaintiff’s right of recovery, the defendant dissuaded the plaintiff from collecting by sundry excuses and devices, and now has the courage to urge that the plaintiff has been guilty of laches in this behalf. The delivery of the note to the plaintiff in payment of the defendant’s debt, was, of itself, a warranty that the paper was in truth just what it purported to be. It was a warranty that the indorsements were genuine in form and in substance, and the plaintiff had the right to assume that the paper would be clear of this defence for six years from the date of the last indorsement.
The judgment of the County Court was morally and legally correct, and is affirmed.