Kile v. Kilner
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 89, April T., 1908, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Mercer Co., Jan. T., 1905, No. 304, on verdict for plaintiff in case of William Kile v. Harriet Kilner. Assumpsit by a surety against a principal on a note under seal.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 89, April T., 1908, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Mercer Co., Jan. T., 1905, No. 304, on verdict for plaintiff in case of William Kile v. Harriet Kilner. Assumpsit by a surety against a principal on a note under seal. Before Williams, P. J. At the trial it appeared that the note was in the following form: “$150.00 ■ Mercer, Pa., Feb’y 29, 1904. “ Four months after date we, or either of us, promise to pay to The Farmers’ and Mechanics’ National Bank, Mercer, Pa., one hundred fifty dollars. • - “Value received. “And in case of default of payment at maturity, an additional…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Beaver, J.,
Kile, the use plaintiff here, was bail for the husband of the defendant upon a note under seal, in the Farmers’ & Mechanics’ National Bank, Mercer, Pennsylvania. About the time of its maturity a new note was sent to Kilner, the husband, who was at that time ill and in a nervous condition. He requested his wife to sign the note and send it to Kile for his signature. The wife signed her own name instead of that of her husband and, after his death, sent the note to Kile.
The special verdict of the jury finds certain facts important to be borne in mind, as follows: “We find…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- R. Patrick & Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Herr v. ReinoehlSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Kulp v. BrantSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Kuhn v. OgilvieSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Peter Adams Paper Co. v. CassardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.