Hathaway v. Crosby
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Exceptions from the Court of Common Pleas, Redjngton J. presiding. Both parties excepted. Fróm the exceptions on the part of the plaintiff it appeared, that the action was debt, declaring on the penalty of a bond by the defendants to Warren Hathaway, the intestate, dated April 30, 1836, in the penal sum of $1415,78 given to procure the enlargement of Crosby from prison, to which be had been committed on that day on execution in favor of the intestate, issued on a judgment…
Read the full summary
Exceptions from the Court of Common Pleas, Redjngton J. presiding. Both parties excepted. Fróm the exceptions on the part of the plaintiff it appeared, that the action was debt, declaring on the penalty of a bond by the defendants to Warren Hathaway, the intestate, dated April 30, 1836, in the penal sum of $1415,78 given to procure the enlargement of Crosby from prison, to which be had been committed on that day on execution in favor of the intestate, issued on a judgment recovered against- Crosby at the Sept. Tfirm of the Court of Common Pleas, 1835, for $686,15, debt, and $9,61, costs. The…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was drawn up by
Shf.pi.ey J.
There is a material difference between bonds with a condition, which provides for the performance of some covenant or agreement, and those conditioned to be void or defeated upon performance only of some act or duty. In the latter class of bonds with a defeasance the obligor is not obliged to perform the act. lie may do it or not at his election; and no action of cove*452nant can be maintained against him. In the former class the obligor is obliged to perform in the manner provided in the condition, and the penalty of the bond is but a security…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Douglas v. HennessySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1886