Barker v. M'Clure
Indiana Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Gibson Circuit Court.—Debt by M’Clure against Barker upon a writing obligatory for the payment of 200 dollars. The obligation appeared, on oyer, to be joint and several, and to have been executed by Prince, Sloan, and Barker. Three pleas: first, a former recovery against all the obligors.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Gibson Circuit Court.—Debt by M’Clure against Barker upon a writing obligatory for the payment of 200 dollars. The obligation appeared, on oyer, to be joint and several, and to have been executed by Prince, Sloan, and Barker. Three pleas: first, a former recovery against all the obligors. Replication to this plea, that M’Clure did not recover judgment against the three obligors, as appears by the record; and that no such judgment does or ever did exist; and this ho is ready to verify. Second plea, that Sloan and Barker were sureties for Prince in the obligation; that…
1Opinion of the CourtHolman, J.
A hill of exceptions shows, that the defendant offered parol evidence in support of his second plea,—that the plaintiff did give further time for payment as pleaded; but the plaintiff objected to the evidence, on the ground that if such further time was given it could he proved by written evidence *15only; and the Court sustained the objection, and rejected the evidence (1).
The rejection of this evidence is the most prominentfeature in the case. It is justified by the defendant in error, on the ground that the plea is no bar to the action. The piea cannot be supported. We have seen no case where…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cited by13 opinions
- Lenfers v. HenkeIllinois Supreme Court · 1874
- Arnold v. MundySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1821
- Hogshead v. WilliamsIndiana Supreme Court · 1876
- Preston v. HoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Durbin v. Northwestern Scraper Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1905
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.