Weed v. Grant
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Bill in equity for an injunction against the further prosecution of an action at law. On the 10th of April, 1855, the respondent lent $2,000 to a . copartnership by the name of the American Hoe Company, composed of Lewis R. Boyd and James Humphrey, Jr., and the firm by their firm name gave their note for the amount payable on demand, which note was guarantied by James Humphrey, Sen., by the following indorsement upon it: “I hereby guarantee the within till paid.
Read the full summary
Bill in equity for an injunction against the further prosecution of an action at law. On the 10th of April, 1855, the respondent lent $2,000 to a . copartnership by the name of the American Hoe Company, composed of Lewis R. Boyd and James Humphrey, Jr., and the firm by their firm name gave their note for the amount payable on demand, which note was guarantied by James Humphrey, Sen., by the following indorsement upon it: “I hereby guarantee the within till paid. James Humphrey.” The loan was made to the copartnership upon the application of James Humphrey, Sen., with whom the respondent was…
1Opinion of the CourtEllsworth, J.
This is an application to a court of equity to enjoin the respondent against the further prosecution of an action at law brought by him in the name of ¿the judge of probate on a probate bond given by the petitioners as administrators of the estate of James Humphrey, senior. The breach assigned in that action is the non-payment of a note of $2,120 reported by the commissioners on the estate as a debt due from the estate to the respondent Grant, by reason of a guarantee of the note by the said James Humphrey, sen., indorsed upon it. No question is made but that the note was due at the time it…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Damschroeder v. ThiasSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872
- Olmstead v. BaileySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1869