Haddon v. Chambers
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
This was a case stated for the opinions of Justices Shippen and Smith, who sat at Nisi Prius, at the last May assizes for Huntingdon county. * The action was brought on a promise of indemni- r*cqp fication for money paid, laid out, and expended for the *- defendant’s use.
Read the full summary
This was a case stated for the opinions of Justices Shippen and Smith, who sat at Nisi Prius, at the last May assizes for Huntingdon county. * The action was brought on a promise of indemni- r*cqp fication for money paid, laid out, and expended for the *- defendant’s use. On the 3d October 1787, the plaintiff executed a joint and several bond as surety for the defendant, and at his instance, to William Thompson, conditioned for the payment of 14I. 12s. 6d. and interest within one year. On the 15th July 1788, the defendant was discharged, under the insolvent laws of the state of Maryland, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Smith J.
now delivered the opinion of Mr. Justice Shippen and himself, in which the whole court concurred. No doubt could possibly arise in this case, were it to be judged of by the bankrupt laws of England. Many decisions have settled the point, that as to debts arising after bankruptcy, though on a pre-existing ground, creditors cannot come in under the commission, nor are barred by the bankrupt’s certificate. 3 Wills. 13, 262. 2 Bl. Rep. 794. Cowp. 527. 1 Term Rep. 599. But *it is insisted by the defendant’s counsel, that the J words of the Maryland act being all debts owing or contracted,…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Bowen v. BurkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1850
- Mackaness v. LongSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1877
- In re HollerUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2011