Carroll v. Nixon
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the District Court for the city and county of Philadelphia. This was an action of assumpsit brought by Henry Carroll and William Sterret, executors of Samuel Sterret, deceased, against the executors of Henry Nixon, deceased.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the District Court for the city and county of Philadelphia. This was an action of assumpsit brought by Henry Carroll and William Sterret, executors of Samuel Sterret, deceased, against the executors of Henry Nixon, deceased. The first count of the narr. alleged that on the 4th of March 1818, Thomas Morris procured Samuel Sterret, deceased, and Robert Johnson to become his sureties to the State of Maryland, for the faithful performance of the duties of Morris, as .administrator of Archibald Kane, deceased ; and before the execution of the bond, promised Sterret to procure for him…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Kennedy, J.
— This action, being assumpsit, is founded upon a promise of indemnity, and the only question raised in it is, was the consideration sufficient in law to render the promise binding. The court below considered the consideration as past; and as Nixon, the party who made the promise of indemnity, derived no benefit whatever from it, this promise was therefore to be regarded as a nudum pacturh, upon which no action could be maintained for a breach of it. We, however, think the court were mistaken in the view which they took of the matter: for…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Wolford v. PowersIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- Carman v. NobleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1848
- Pinckney v. PomeroyNew York Supreme Court · 1862
- Hamilton v. DiefenderferWyoming Supreme Court · 1913