Fletcher v. Edson
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was assumpsit in two counts: the first on a promissory note, dated July 5tb, A. D. 1830, for $ 1150, payable on demand; the other on the same note in connection with a written condition or contract entered upon the back of the note.
Read the full summary
This was assumpsit in two counts: the first on a promissory note, dated July 5tb, A. D. 1830, for $ 1150, payable on demand; the other on the same note in connection with a written condition or contract entered upon the back of the note. The second count was as follows : “And for that the said Edson on' the fifth day of July, 1830, at said Woodstock, was justly indebted to one Barnard of Boston in the commonwealth of Massachusetts, in the sum of eleven hundred and fifty dollars, current money of this state, and the said Edson then and there requested plaintiff to sign and execute with him,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Royce, J.
As a mere promise to indemnify against an outstanding demand does not furnish a cause of action to the promisee, upon his simply becoming liable to a suit on such demand, and as it did not appear in this instance that the plaintiff had paid the debt or any part of it, his right of recovery might depend on the peculiar terms in which the present contract of indemnity was framed. The contract consists of the note for $1150, payable on demand, controlled and qualified by the stipulation endorsed upon it. Taken together they amount to an…
2Cited by3 opinions
- James A. Shedd & Co. v. Bank of BrattleboroSupreme Court of Vermont · 1860
- Bean v. ParkerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1915
- May v. NewmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1893