Guthrie v. Fisher
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Oneida County. A demand of the specific thing agreed to be performed by the covenant must be alleged and proved, otherwise no cause of action is stated. (Nelson v. Bostwick, 5 Hill, 37, 40 Am.. Dee. 310.) Sureties to an instrument cannot be charged or affected beyond the plain and necessary import of their undertaking; nor can a new term or condition be added to their stipulation.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Oneida County. A demand of the specific thing agreed to be performed by the covenant must be alleged and proved, otherwise no cause of action is stated. (Nelson v. Bostwick, 5 Hill, 37, 40 Am.. Dee. 310.) Sureties to an instrument cannot be charged or affected beyond the plain and necessary import of their undertaking; nor can a new term or condition be added to their stipulation. (Smith v. United States, 2 Wall, 219; McClusTcy v. Cromwell, 11 N. Y. 598; Walsh v. Bailie, 10 Johns, 181; United States v. Jones, 8 Pet. 399; United States v. Boyd, 15 Pet. 187; Miller…
1Per curiam
This action is founded upon an undertaking given in an attachment suit brought by these plaintiffs against Phelan & Ferguson. The undertaking was given for the release from attachment of the property which had been seized by the attachment issued in the case, as the property of said Phelan & Ferguson, to secure the payment of any judgment which might be recovered in the action against them. By the undertaking the defendants promised that, in case the plaintiffs recovered judgment against Phelan & Ferguson in the action, they (Phelan & Ferguson) would, on demand, redeliver the property so…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Nash v. HarrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Guthrie v. PhelanIdaho Supreme Court · 1885
- Fox v. WestIdaho Supreme Court · 1880
3Cited by3 opinions
- Pederson v. JohnsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1919
- Purdum v. TaylorIdaho Supreme Court · 1886
- Berry v. Alturas CountyIdaho Supreme Court · 1887