
    (20 Misc. Rep. 172.)
    NILES v. BRADLEY.
    (City Court of New York,
    General Term.
    April, 1897.)
    Bills and Notes—Actions on—Pleading.
    A complaint is not defective because it does not allege that the note sued on was payable at a specified time, but the absence of such allegation raises a presumption the note did not specify any time of payment.
    Appeal from special term
    Action by Hosford B. Niles against George B. Bradley on a promissory note. From a judgment overruling a demurrer to the complaint, defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before VAN WYGK, C. J., and McCARTHY, J.
    C. C. Alden, for appellant.
    Fred. Eberhardt, for respondent.
   VAN WYCK, C. J.

The complaint is that defendant, on October 1, 1894, made and delivered his promissory note in writing, whereby he promised to pay to one Holland $500; that same was duly assigned to plaintiff; that payment thereof was duly demanded, and no part has been paid; and that there remains due and owing thereon to plaintiff from defendant $500, with interest. The appellant contends that, because it is not alleged that the note was payable at a specified time, the complaint' is insufficient. The absence of siich an allegation raises the presumption that no time of payment was specified in the note. Where no time or place of payment is specified in a promissory note, it is payable immediately, and payment thereof may be demanded of the maker at any time and place where he can be found. The judgment and order are affirmed, with costs.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

McCARTHY, J., concurs.  