Case v. Spaulding
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action of assumpsit, brought to the city court for the city of Hartford, against the defendant, as a party liable on two promissory notes. The declaration embraced the common counts and several special counts.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, brought to the city court for the city of Hartford, against the defendant, as a party liable on two promissory notes. The declaration embraced the common counts and several special counts. In one of the latter counts the cause of action was stated thus: “Samuel C. Spaulding and Ariel Coy, partners in business under the firm of Spaulding & Co., in and by a certain writing or note under their hand, executed by them, by their said co-partnership name, within the limits of said city of Hartford, and since the incorporation thereof, promised the plaintiffs to pay…
1Opinion of the CourtEllsworth, J.
It is found that the note, in suit, was given in renewal of a larger one of $400, payable at the Farmers’ and Mechanics’ bank. That note was given by S. C. Spaulding & Co., to these plaintiffs, to apply on their debt due to the plaintiffs, of some eight hundred dollars. No other name was asked for, or expected, by the plaintiffs, as security for that note. Afterward, when the plaintiffs wished to get the note discounted, they endorsed, and offered it for that purpose, at the bank. But the bank declined to discount it without another name, whereupon the plaintiffs, at their own request,…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Dale v. GearSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1871
- Schindler v. MuhlheiserSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1877
- Nesson v. MillenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
- Choolgian v. NordstromSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
- First National Bank of St. Paul v. National Marine Bank of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1873
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.