Watson v. Tarpley,
59 U.S. 517 (1855)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Watson v. Tarpley, 59 U.S. 18 How. 517 517 (1855)

Watson v. Tarpley

59 U.S. (18 How.) 517


The regularity and legality of the proceedings which take place as to protest and notice upon a dishonored bill of exchange is a question of law for the court to decide, and not a question to be left to the jury.

By the general rules of commercial law, the payee or endorsee of a bill, upon its presentment and upon refusal by the drawee to accept, has the right to immediate recourse against the drawer. He is not bound to wait to see whether or not the bill will be paid at maturity.

A statute of a state which forbids a suit from being brought in such a case until after the maturity of the bill can have no effect upon suits brought in the courts of the United States. So also, if the statute seeks to make the right of recovery, in a suit brought in case of nonacceptance, dependent upon proof of subsequent presentment, protest, and notice for nonpayment.

The decisions of this Court upon these points examined.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.