Blake v. Ladd
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, on a joint and several note, signed by the defendants. Hiram Ladd, one of the defendants, was defaulted. John Ladd, the othdr defendant, pleaded the general issue, and accompanied it with a brief statement, setting up insanity, as to himself, at the time of signing the note, as the ground of defence. It appeared that Hiram Ladd was the principal debtor, and John Ladd surety.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, on a joint and several note, signed by the defendants. Hiram Ladd, one of the defendants, was defaulted. John Ladd, the othdr defendant, pleaded the general issue, and accompanied it with a brief statement, setting up insanity, as to himself, at the time of signing the note, as the ground of defence. It appeared that Hiram Ladd was the principal debtor, and John Ladd surety. John Ladd, having first executed to Hiram a release from all claim or liability to pay him any part of any judgment that might be recovered against him, offered Hiram as a witness, with his consent, to testify…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
In Pillsbury vs. Cammett, 2 N. H. Rep. 283, this court held that one of two defendants, in an action ex contractu, who had been defaulted, was not a competent witness for the other. The reason given is, that a verdict in favor of the other placed the plaintiff in a situation in which he could not avail himself of the default. The defendant who was thus defaulted had of course an interest to testify in favor of his co-defendant. It is not suggested in that case that there was .any policy of the law which should exclude him, aside from his interest. A similar decision is found in 2 Vermont R.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Pillsbury v. CammettSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1820
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bowman v. NoyesSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1841
- Manchester Bank v. MooreSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1849
- Morse v. GreenSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1842