Sothoron v. Weems
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Appeal from Saint Mary’s County Court. Assumpsit by the appellees for the use of Gustavus Weems, commenced against the appellant, James F. Sothoron, on the 20th of November, 1821. The defendant pleaded non assumpsit, to which issue was taken.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Saint Mary’s County Court. Assumpsit by the appellees for the use of Gustavus Weems, commenced against the appellant, James F. Sothoron, on the 20th of November, 1821. The defendant pleaded non assumpsit, to which issue was taken. (See Weems, et ad. vs. Millard, 2 Harr, and Gill, 143.) At the trial the plaintiffs read to the jury the following paper: “We the subscribers promise and oblige ourselves, our heirs and executors, to pay or cause to be paid unto George Weems Sc Co. the sum we may subscribe as a payment for the steam boat Surprize, in three equal instalments, in manner…
1Opinion of the CourtDorsey, J.
The County Court were right in refusing the defendant’s prayer, in his first bill of exceptions, it being a general prayer, the granting of which, since the act of 1825, would be error. To this refusal no exception was taken. But the court, however, did not stop here; they instructed the jury, “that the contract or subscription list, bore on its face evidence that Gustavus and George Weems, the plaintiffs, were the proprietors and owners of the steam boat Surprize, at the time when the said list or contract was signed, and that the said list proved the averment of ownership in the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- J. A. Laporte Corp. v. Pennsylvania-Dixie Cement Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1933
- Warner v. HardyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1854
- Parker v. SedwickCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1846
- Lease v. Upper Potomac River CommissionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1941