Legal Opinion

Newell v. Clark

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided June 6, 1905PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Assumpsit, upon a promissory note. Writ dated July 25, 1904. Transferred from the January term, 1905, of the superior court by Wallace, C. J., upon an agreed statement of facts. The defendants are sureties on a note for $1,000 given by Charles F. Piper to the plaintiff, dated December 18, 1897, and payable “ on demand, with interest annually.”

Read the full summary

Assumpsit, upon a promissory note. Writ dated July 25, 1904. Transferred from the January term, 1905, of the superior court by Wallace, C. J., upon an agreed statement of facts. The defendants are sureties on a note for $1,000 given by Charles F. Piper to the plaintiff, dated December 18, 1897, and payable “ on demand, with interest annually.” In addition to the provisions usual in such notes, “the sureties agree to be liable without notice as long as there is any liability of the principal.” January 1, 1904, Piper paid the interest to December 18, 1903. He died before this action was…

1Opinion of the CourtYoung, J.

The words “with interest annually” are not ordinarily used in notes of this kind for the purpose of constituting the maker the agent of the sureties to renew the note, but to prescribe the rule by which the interest is to be computed. Townsend v. Riley, 46 N. H. 300, 313, 315. So the mere fact that the note is payable on demand, with interest annually, has no tendency to prove that the sureties intended to constitute the maker their agent to renew it. Neither has the clause in the note in relation to the liability of the sureties any such tendency, either when standing alone or when taken in…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Shapley v. . AbbottNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
  2. McMullen v. . RaffertyNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  3. Crane v. FrenchMississippi Supreme Court · 1860
  4. State Loan & Trust Co. v. CochranCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  5. Bridges v. StephensSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Merrimack River Savings Bank v. HigginsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1937
  2. Fowler v. Barlow Et Ux.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1929
  3. Premier Capital, Inc. v. GallagherSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1999
  4. Gans v. GantDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 2013
  5. Samuel Cooling & Security Trust Co. v. SpringerSuperior Court of Delaware · 1943

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API