Oldham v. Broom
Ohio Supreme Court
Error to District Court of Guernsey county. This was an action in the court below by Daniel Broom against Oldham, to compel contribution, on the ground that they were co-sureties of one Hugh Broom, on a note joint in form, executed by. all, as makers, to secure to one Mathews money owing by Hugh, for whose accommodation the plaintiff’ and defendant became liable as co-sureties of Hugh, who is insolvent.
Read the full summary
Error to District Court of Guernsey county. This was an action in the court below by Daniel Broom against Oldham, to compel contribution, on the ground that they were co-sureties of one Hugh Broom, on a note joint in form, executed by. all, as makers, to secure to one Mathews money owing by Hugh, for whose accommodation the plaintiff’ and defendant became liable as co-sureties of Hugh, who is insolvent. The petition further states that after the maturity and non-payment Mathews recovered a judgment against all the makers, and, to satisfy the same, sold plaintiff’s property ; and the prayer is…
1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.
The note was in form the joint obligation *47of all the makers. There was nothing to indicate that either was a surety. Prima facie, all were principals.
The pleadings admit that Daniel Broom and plaintiff in error were accommodation makers, and that Hugh Broom was the principal debtor.
The question in issue was whether Daniel Broom and Oldham were co-sureties of Hugh, or whether Oldham was the surety of both the prior makers.
They had been co-sureties on a former note, in renewal of which this was delivered to Matthews.
It was signed by Hugh and Daniel, and in that condition was presented by Hugh…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- McDonald v. MagruderSupreme Court of the United States · 1830
- Harris v. WarnerNew York Supreme Court · 1835
- Bowser v. RendellIndiana Supreme Court · 1869
- Keith v. GoodwinSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858
- Robison v. LyleNew York Supreme Court · 1851
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.