Elmendorph v. Tappen
New York Supreme Court
THIS cause came before the court, on a writ of error, from the court of'common pleas of Ulster county. The plaintiff sued the defendants below, in an action of assumpsit. The declaration was for goods sold and delivered, money lent, and money had and received tor the use °f the plaintiff; and on an inshnul computassent.■ rpjle defendants pleaded non assumpsit.
Read the full summary
THIS cause came before the court, on a writ of error, from the court of'common pleas of Ulster county. The plaintiff sued the defendants below, in an action of assumpsit. The declaration was for goods sold and delivered, money lent, and money had and received tor the use °f the plaintiff; and on an inshnul computassent.■ rpjle defendants pleaded non assumpsit. At the trial, the plaintiff gave in evidence a bond, dated ire. ’ the 26th of August, 1798, executed by the defendants to e the United States, for 2,000 dollars* conditioned that if George Tappen, John Tappen and William Gilmore, (being…
1Opinion of the Court
Kent, Ch. J.
delivered the opinion of the court. The plaintiff below declared upon a joint promise by all the defendants ; and unless the evidence offered, supported the charge of a joint assumpsit, either express or implied, he was properly nonsuited. I did think, at first, that the consent of all the joint debtors was implied, by thé request of one of them to the plaintiff, to pay their bond; but on adverting to the condition of the bond, this inference cannot be supported. It appears on the face of the bond *178that the debt was the proper debt of three of the co-obli* , , _ . , gors5 but that…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Garth v. McCampbellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1846
- Prescott v. PerkinsSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1844
- Rolfe v. LambSupreme Court of Vermont · 1844