Childs v. Horr
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from the Dubuque District Court. This canse was beard upon bill and answer. Tbe bill sets out that complainant- and one Hawthorne were in partnership, and as such partners were indebted to respondents in the sum of $750, and that in January, 1855, respondents agreed with complainant, that if he would secure them as to the payment of one-half of said partnership indebtedness, they would release him entirely from the payment of the ■other half, and that in pursuance…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Dubuque District Court. This canse was beard upon bill and answer. Tbe bill sets out that complainant- and one Hawthorne were in partnership, and as such partners were indebted to respondents in the sum of $750, and that in January, 1855, respondents agreed with complainant, that if he would secure them as to the payment of one-half of said partnership indebtedness, they would release him entirely from the payment of the ■other half, and that in pursuance thereof, he made and executed a promissory note, secured by a good and responsible indorser, for $375, payable to…
1Opinion of the CourtWright, C. J.
Respondents now claim that upon this bill and answer, the bill should have been dismissed, and a decree entered in their favor. W e think otherwise, however. The question does not arise, whether the second note was, or was not, a satisfaction and discharge in part, of the original promise or indebtedness. There can be no pretence that the respondents were, under the circumstances stated, either in the bill or answer, precluded from suing on the original notes, as against Hawthorne, if not against Childs. As the case now stands, these questions do not become material for our consideration. The…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Shepard v. FordSupreme Court of Iowa · 1860