Legal Opinion
Beardsley v. Hawes
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided July 26, 1898PublishedCited by 13 opinions
Action to recover the amount of a promissory note, brought to the Superior Court in Fairfield County and tried to the court, Thayer, J.; facts found and judgment rendered in favor of the plaintiff, and appeal by two of the defendants, guarantors of the note, for alleged errors in the rulings of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHall, J.
The note and guaranty upon which this action was brought, were as follows:
“ 12,000. Bridgeport, Conn., Jan. 6th, 1896.
“ On demand for value received, we jointly and severally promise to pay Win. S. Beardsley or order, the sum of two thousand dollars ($2,000), with interest payable semiannually in advance on the 1st days of July and January in each year, at the rate of six (6) per cent, per annum.
“ Mart E. Hawes,
“ Sarah E. Hawes.
“Note to be paid by the Misses Hawes.
“We sign the above note for security for payment thereof which we hereby guarantee for a valuable consideration received.
“ George…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cowles v. PeckSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1887
- Gillespie v. WheelerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1878
- Hayes v. WernerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1877
3Cited by13 opinions
- Hansel v. Hartford-Connecticut Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1946
- Pavlantos v. GaroufalisCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1937
- Higinbotham v. ManchesterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
- Perry v. CohenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
- Savings Bank of New Britain v. WeedSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1936
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.