Bank of Montpelier v. Dixon
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action of assumpsit on a promissory note for $4000, payable to the Bank oj Montpelier, in ninety days from date, with the names of Gideon O'. Dixon, Luther Dixon, Geo.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit on a promissory note for $4000, payable to the Bank oj Montpelier, in ninety days from date, with the names of Gideon O'. Dixon, Luther Dixon, Geo. Howe, and Peter Shaw subscribed thereto, in the order here given, as joint and several promissors — dated April, 1826, and discounted at the bank on the 26th day of April, 1826. Plea, general issue, and trial by jury. ' ■ The note declared on having been read in evidence, it yvas ¡proved, that the same was .presented for discount by Gideon O. Dixon, who had previously notified the plaintiffs that he should have…
1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, J.
The only question presented in this case is, whether the dissolution of the attachment made by the plaintiffs on the property of Gideon O. Dixon was a discharge of the other signers to the note on which this suit is brought ? The county court so decided ; and if their decision is correct, the plaintiffs have no further claim on the defendant. If it was not, there must be a new trial, as there are no other facts established which will entitle the defendant to retain the verdict. This presents the inquiry as to the rights and duties of a plaintiff or creditor, in a case similar to the present.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Fulton v. MatthewsNew York Supreme Court · 1818
- Commonwealth ex rel. Bellas v. VandersliceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1822
3Cited by9 opinions
- Nelson v. WebsterNebraska Supreme Court · 1904
- Whitehouse v. American Surety Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1902
- Glazier v. DouglassSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1865
- Executors of Baker v. MarshallSupreme Court of Vermont · 1844
- Howard National Bank v. ArbuckleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1917
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.