Miller v. Howry
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
IN ERROR. Error to the district court of Lancaster county. This was an amicable action on the case, in which Henry Howry and David Book, administrators of John Howry, deceased, the defendants in error, were plaintiffs, and David Miller, the plaintiff in tuTor, was defendant, and in which, the following case, stated In nature of a speeial Verdict, was agreed by the parties: John Dowry, the intestate of the plaintiffs, Abraham Doner, Samuel Herr, Abraham Melz'ler, Samuel…
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. Error to the district court of Lancaster county. This was an amicable action on the case, in which Henry Howry and David Book, administrators of John Howry, deceased, the defendants in error, were plaintiffs, and David Miller, the plaintiff in tuTor, was defendant, and in which, the following case, stated In nature of a speeial Verdict, was agreed by the parties: John Dowry, the intestate of the plaintiffs, Abraham Doner, Samuel Herr, Abraham Melz'ler, Samuel Howry, and Peter Espenshade, severally obtained judgments in -the court of Common Pleas of Lancaster county, on their several…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Gibson, C..J.
'The execution having been in due ti,mc, and; *380founded on an actual judgment, was neither erroneous nor irregular; and the question therefore is whether it were fraudulent by the dial. 13 Eliz. in consequence of having issued before actual payment of the debt for which the counter bond was given as an indemnity. The chief obstacle to a satisfactory conclusion, is a tendency in the mind to view the case as it stood originally, and to consider the question of indebtedness, as still depending on the naked relation of principal and surety.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cumming & Cumming v. Hackley & FisherNew York Supreme Court · 1811
- Roosevelt v. MarkNew York Court of Chancery · 1822
- Morrison v. BerkeySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1821