Harrington v. Witherow
Indiana Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
A. ASSIGNED to B. a note against C. in payment of a judgment which B. had obtained against A.; and it was agreed, that if the money could not be obtained by due course of law from C., A. would pay to B. the amount due on the judgment. Held, that, in a suit by B. against A., after failure to recover the money from C., an averment in the declaration that the plaintiff had, without delay, prosecuted C. to insolvency without obtaining the money is insufficient;—that'due diligence, in' the prosecution of a suit, is a matter of law arising out of the facts of the case, which facts must be set out…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Starbuck v. MurrayNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Harrod v. BarrettoThe Superior Court of New York City · 1828
3Cited by4 opinions
- Hines v. DriverIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- Sellers v. Union Lumbering Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1876
- Reno v. RobertsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1874
- Trustees of Dartmouth College v. WoodwardSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1817