Grier v. Huston
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. ERROR to Lycoming county. The plaintiff in error, who was plaintiff below, declared against the defendant,' in two counts: one for money had and received, &c.; the other for money, lent, &c.
Read the full summary
In Error. ERROR to Lycoming county. The plaintiff in error, who was plaintiff below, declared against the defendant,' in two counts: one for money had and received, &c.; the other for money, lent, &c. On the trial, the plaintiff offered in evidence the following account and receipt: “ John Kidd, esq. deceased, account against Samuel E. Grier 8? Co.: An order on Phineas Bond, on which Mr. Gr.ier received, on the 10th of May, 1803, $559 15 Interest on the above to this time, 335 40 894 55 Hepburn 8? GriePs account proven against John Kidd, esq. deceased 443 75 Balance g451 80 “ Received of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Tilghman, C. J. —
The first reason assigned by the counsel for the defendant, in support of the opinion of the Court below, is, that the receipt was signed by Thomas Huston, administrator of John Kidd, deceased, and therefore not evidence in this action, in which Thomas Huston is charged personally. But this is not a sufficient answer; for although the defendant signed the receipt as administrator, he is responsible personally. The plaintiff never had any claim against John Kidd, the intestate, for the money paid by him to the defendant, the repayment…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Geyer v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1788
3Cited by1 opinion
- Beeson v. McNabbSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1846