Farmers' & Mechanics' Bank of Michigan v. Evans
New York Supreme Court
Motion by the defendant for a new trial, on a case. The action was debt on a bond, dated May 26, 1835, in a penalty of $10,000. The condition of the bond was “ that Justus Ingersoll and Zebulon Kirby, traders in the city of Detroit, under the firm of Ingersoll & Kirby, shall and will from time to time as occasion may require, ask for and receive from the said president, directors and company, certain sums of money at no time exceeding the sum of $5000, now if the said…
Read the full summary
Motion by the defendant for a new trial, on a case. The action was debt on a bond, dated May 26, 1835, in a penalty of $10,000. The condition of the bond was “ that Justus Ingersoll and Zebulon Kirby, traders in the city of Detroit, under the firm of Ingersoll & Kirby, shall and will from time to time as occasion may require, ask for and receive from the said president, directors and company, certain sums of money at no time exceeding the sum of $5000, now if the said Ingersoll & Kirby shall well and truly pay or cause to be paid to the said president, directors and company all such sums as…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Marvin, J.
The construction which I put upon the guaranty renders it unnecessary to examine several other questions discussed on the argument. There is some difficulty in construing the language in the condition of the *489oond; but we must first ascertain and declare its meaning, and then apply to it the rules of law to determine the liability of the defendant.
A guaranty should be construed by the same rules that are applied in the construction of other instruments. The leading rule is to ascertain, from the written instrument, the intention of the parties to it. The whole context…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Simonson v. GrantSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- W. W. Kimball Co. v. BakerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1885
- Weill v. HechtThe Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · 1895
- Long v. American Surety Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1912
- Pratt v. MatthewsNew York Supreme Court · 1881
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.