Legal Opinion
Menaugh v. Chandler
Indiana Supreme Court
Decided November 15, 1882No. 9495PublishedCited by 4 opinions
From the Carroll Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtElliott, J.
The appellants executed to the appellees a promissory note containing the following stipulation: “All whose names are signed to or endorsed upon this note expressly agree to be held as principal debtors.” The appellant Menaugh bought a claim against the appellees, and insists upon his right to set it off against the note.
The stipulation in the note precludes Menaugh from asserting that he is a surety. It is a general rule that a party can not contradict his own note or bond. Miller v. Elliott, 1 Ind. 484; Hiatt v. Simpson, 8 Ind. 256; Madison, etc., Co. v. Stevens, 10 Ind. 1. In accordance…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Samuel Sprigg, in Error v. The Bank of Mount PleasantSupreme Court of the United States · 1836
- Sprigg v. Bank of Mount PleasantSupreme Court of the United States · 1840
- Basse v. GalleggerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1859
- Harris v. RiversIndiana Supreme Court · 1876
- Madison & Indianapolis, Plankroad Co. v. StevensIndiana Supreme Court · 1857
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Barton Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. BickfordSupreme Court of Vermont · 1923
- Ringgenberg v. HartmanIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
- Merchant's National Bank v. MurphySupreme Court of Iowa · 1904
- Minor v. WoodwardMissouri Court of Appeals · 1914