Commissioners of Berks County v. Ross
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Sf the oblig-ee undertakes to discharge the principal, or in any considerable degree to lessen his reswiüiout consulting the surety, discharged; but the mere accofnmon against the prinmpal, m consequence oí which the latter exeeuted an assignment to secure part of the debt, has no effect tspon the obligalion of the surety, although it furnished the principal with an opportunity to leave the state.
Read the full summary
Sf the oblig-ee undertakes to discharge the principal, or in any considerable degree to lessen his reswiüiout consulting the surety, discharged; but the mere accofnmon against the prinmpal, m consequence oí which the latter exeeuted an assignment to secure part of the debt, has no effect tspon the obligalion of the surety, although it furnished the principal with an opportunity to leave the state. There is no against granting anew trial after ffdiftefior”^ •will the court tfif thVverdiets are against ia The principle which lias goreftSng the* plaintiff' a new trial, where his demand has been…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilgiuian C. J.
The defendants’ counsel founded his argument against granting a new trial on three points. 1st, *523That it was a hard case. 2d, That the verdict was agreeable to the law. 3d, That there have been two verdicts for the defendants.
1. Not much need be said on the first point. There is no more hardship in this case, than in cases in general where a surety has to pay money. It is unfortunate, that a man should be obliged to pay for the default of his friend, and in that sense it may be said to be hard; but it would be much harder if the rules of property should be set aside, because the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Lessee of Burkart v. BucherSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1810
3Cited by7 opinions
- Commonwealth Ex Rel. Dollar Savings & Trust Co. v. PicardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Geddis v. HawkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
- Wagman v. HoagNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Lanusse v. BarkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1818
- Grafton Bank v. KentSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1827
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.