Dean v. Marsteller, 2 Cranch 121

Dean v. Marsteller

2 Cranch 121 | U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia | 1816

Cranch, C. J.

It is difficult to perceive wherein the equity of this case consists. The suit is against a remote indorser, but the reason for not resorting to the intermediate indorsers is not stated. *123I do not perceive that it follows, that because a person has not relief at law, he must necessarily have a remedy in equity; yet that seems to be the only ground of equity relied upon in the bill. It does not appear, from the bill, that the defendant had notice of the non-payment of the note by Wilson or his administrator, so as to become liable at law; and if not liable at law, I see no ground to charge him in equity. But if he had notice, yet he was discharged in equity by the negligence of the complainant and those under whom he claims, in not proceeding to enforce payment from Wilson’s estate.

Morsell, J., concurred. Thruston, J., absent.