Penley v. Record
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions. Assumpsit, “for that the said defendant, at said Auburn, on the twenty-eighth day of November, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy, by their promissory note of that date by them signed, for value received, jointly and severally, promised the plaintiff to pay him or his order the sum of four hundred dollars in six months, with interest,” etc. There was but one count in the writ.
Read the full summary
On exceptions. Assumpsit, “for that the said defendant, at said Auburn, on the twenty-eighth day of November, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy, by their promissory note of that date by them signed, for value received, jointly and severally, promised the plaintiff to pay him or his order the sum of four hundred dollars in six months, with interest,” etc. There was but one count in the writ. The defendants demurred to the writ and declaration and assigned for causes of demurrer “that the plaintiff has not, in or by his said declaration, alleged or shown that both…
1Opinion of the CourtDickerson, J.
The principle cause assigned for the demurrer is the alleged uncertainty as to which of the defendants signed the note in suit. It is argued in support of the demurrer that the designation of the defendant party in the declaration, as of the singular number, renders it uncertain which of the defendants executed the *417notes. This would undoubtedly be good cause for demurrer, if it was not obviated by the subsequent language of the declaration. From that it appears that the note sued is described as “their promissory note by them signed,” and that the promise to the plaintiff was “joint and…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Meyer v. RossAppellate Court of Illinois · 1905
- Riggins v. HinchmanCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1885