Van Demark v. Van Demark
New York Supreme Court
Motion by defendants, that complaint be made more definite' and certain, &c: The action is brought to recover money alleged to have been paid by the plaintiff as surety for James Van Demark upoii two notes, given by the latter to Luther James, and' signed by the plaintiff together with Henry Van Demark, the testator, and Charles Van Demark, as co-sureties for the said James Van Demark;, both notes hearing date March 20,1847—one for $208.94, payable two years from date, with…
Read the full summary
Motion by defendants, that complaint be made more definite' and certain, &c: The action is brought to recover money alleged to have been paid by the plaintiff as surety for James Van Demark upoii two notes, given by the latter to Luther James, and' signed by the plaintiff together with Henry Van Demark, the testator, and Charles Van Demark, as co-sureties for the said James Van Demark;, both notes hearing date March 20,1847—one for $208.94, payable two years from date, with interest annually, and the other for $210, payable one year from date, with interest. The plaintiff alleges he-has paid…
1Opinion of the Court
Welles, Justice.
There is no ground for this motion. The plaintiff alleges, in his complaint, that he has paid both the motes, and claims contribution from the estate of one of his co-sureties. After stating the giving of the notes by the principal debtor, their execution by the plaintiff, the testator and Charles Wan Demark, as co-sureties, &c., and the payment of them by the plaintiff, he had stated facts entitling him to contribution from his co-sureties. The law settles the rest, and decides that he is entitled to recover of the defendants as the representatives of -one of his co-sureties,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Owens v. BlackburnAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914
- Leonard v. Charter Oak Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1895