Barry v. . Ransom
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] The language of the bond goes no further than to state the contract between the obligors and the obligee. If there was a cotemporaneous contract between the obligors respecting their rights, duties and obligations among themselves, in the event of their being made liable by the default of Leyden, that contract was not written out in terms, but was the judgment of law upon the fact of their becoming sureties. It follows that an agreement among the sureties…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Griffith v. ReedNew York Supreme Court · 1839
- Creery v. HollyNew York Supreme Court · 1835
- Norton v. CoonsNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- Harris v. WarnerNew York Supreme Court · 1835
- La Farge v. RickertNew York Supreme Court · 1830
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Hubbard v. . GurneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Welz v. RhodiusIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- Cowan v. Radford Iron Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1887
- Easterly v. . BarberNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Shenandoah Land & Anthracite Coal Co. v. HiseSupreme Court of Virginia · 1895
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.