Mahurin v. Pearson
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit on a note for $ 100, dated November 3, 1834, payable to the plaintiff, in sixty days, with interest. The defendant, Bellows, signed the note as surety for Pearson. The defendants pleaded the general issue, with notice of set-off of demands in favor of said Pearson.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit on a note for $ 100, dated November 3, 1834, payable to the plaintiff, in sixty days, with interest. The defendant, Bellows, signed the note as surety for Pearson. The defendants pleaded the general issue, with notice of set-off of demands in favor of said Pearson. The plaintiff objected to receive said set-off, and the evidence offered in support thereof, on the ground of want of mutuality of the parties, the set-off being in favor of one of the defendants only ; whereupon the court rejected the set-off, and the evidence offered. The defendant, Bellows, in order to show a discharge…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, J.
The evidence offered is not sufficient, to discharge the surety. Mere delay by the creditor to collect the debt, after a request to that effect from the surety, will *541not operate as a discharge, (3 N. H. R. 231,) ánd we are of opinion that the evidence does not show such a renunciation of all claim upon the surety, as can avail to discharge him without any consideration paid, or evidence of loss sustained. 2 Stark. Rep. 228, Parker vs. Leigh; ditto 531, Adams vs. Gregg; Doug. 247, Dingwall vs. Dunster; 1 Camp. 35, Whately vs. Tricker; 8 Pick. 122, Baker vs. Briggs; 2 Johns. Ch. Rep. 557, King…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- King v. BaldwinNew York Court of Chancery · 1817
- J. D. Evernghim v. R. & A. EnsworthNew York Supreme Court · 1831
3Cited by3 opinions
- Boardman v. CushingSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1841
- McCann v. DennettSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1843
- Sloan v. KubitskyConnecticut Appellate Court · 1998