Hoyt v. Wilkinson
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Assumpsit. The first count was for $2036'08, on an insimul computassent between Cephas Hoyt, the intestate, and the defendant, on September 11th, 1827 ; the second was for fp 4436-08 on a like insimul computassent; the third was for money had and received ; and the fourth, for money lent and accommodated.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. The first count was for $2036'08, on an insimul computassent between Cephas Hoyt, the intestate, and the defendant, on September 11th, 1827 ; the second was for fp 4436-08 on a like insimul computassent; the third was for money had and received ; and the fourth, for money lent and accommodated. By a statement of facts it appeared, that before September 11th, 1827, the intestate signed a note with the defendant and as ^'s suretyi to J. E. Hall, for $ 1200 on demand with interest, the consideration of which was wholly for the defendant’s benefit. The note was laid by Hall before the…
1Per curiam
We think there is nothing in the contract under seal which should prevent the plaintiffs from maintaining assumpsit. It is not a contract to pay money ; it is a release of mutual demands, except those enumerated ; which remain *34just as if there had been no release. A specialty is not sub-st*tuted for the simple contract.* 1 The intestate and the defendant agree, “ that whenever this account shall be balanced, then and at such time all mortgages, bills of goods or any other property, and notes of hand, which either party holds against the other, shall be cancelled.” This is precise. When the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Morrison v. BerkeySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1821