March v. Putney
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
From Merrimack Circuit Court. Assumpsit, upon a contract of guaranty. Writ dated March 5,1874. The cause was sent to a referee, who made the following report: “ The action is brought to recover of the defendant, as guarantor, for goods sold his two sons, Fred C. and Charles IT. Putney. The guaranty is as follows: In consideration of one dollar to me paid by March Bros.
Read the full summary
From Merrimack Circuit Court. Assumpsit, upon a contract of guaranty. Writ dated March 5,1874. The cause was sent to a referee, who made the following report: “ The action is brought to recover of the defendant, as guarantor, for goods sold his two sons, Fred C. and Charles IT. Putney. The guaranty is as follows: In consideration of one dollar to me paid by March Bros. Pierce & Co., of Boston, Massachusetts, I do hereby guarantee to them the prompt payment, within four months from the date of purchase, for all goods which the said March Bros. Pierce & Co. may from time to time sell to my…
1Opinion of the Court
FROM MERRIMACK CIRCUIT COURT. In order to constitute a valid guaranty, there must be a sufficient consideration, a delivery by the guarantor, an acceptance by the person to whom it is given, a subsequent delivery of goods or other property under and in accordance with its terms, and, if the guaranty is collateral, request of payment within a reasonable time of the person for whose benefit it is given, and notice to the guarantor of non-payment. This, however, is not necessary in all cases.
Where the undertaking to pay is absolute, notice to the guarantor is unnecessary. His liability is fixed…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Beebe v. DudleySuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1853