Todd v. Darling
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
This was a writ of review brought to reverse a judgment rendered in the Court of Common Pleas, March term, 1826, for $532 debt, and $32,65 costs, in favor of Isaac Darling, the present defendant, against John C. Todd, the plaintiff’s intestate. The original writ contained counts on four promissory notes for $200 each, dated May 13, 1820, and payable by said Todd to said Darling, and not negotiable.
Read the full summary
This was a writ of review brought to reverse a judgment rendered in the Court of Common Pleas, March term, 1826, for $532 debt, and $32,65 costs, in favor of Isaac Darling, the present defendant, against John C. Todd, the plaintiff’s intestate. The original writ contained counts on four promissory notes for $200 each, dated May 13, 1820, and payable by said Todd to said Darling, and not negotiable. One payable on demand, the others, in one, two and three years from date, with interest. Judgment was rendered on the last two notes only, the other two not having been filed in the case. Execution…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was, at a subsequent term, delivered by
Weston J.
An objection is taken to the original disclosure of the trustee; it being made not in court, but before a justice of the peace, which it is insisted was not then authorized by law. Whatever might have been the force of this objection, if made seasonably before the trustee judgment, and even admitting the judgment to have been erroneous, it remains in force, until reversed upon writ of error. It is a collateral judgment, incidental to a suit at common law, and can be vacated or avoided only by the same process, which…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Chandler v. WarrenSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858
- Burns v. BelknapSupreme Court of Vermont · 1850