Legal Opinion

Besore v. Potter

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 1, 1824PublishedCited by 2 opinions

IN ERROR. On a writ of error to the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin county, it appeared that David Desore and Henry Miller, executors of Frederick Nicodemus, deceased, the plaintiffs in error, brought this suit against the defendant in error, Daniel Potter, executor of John Potter, deceased, on a penal bill executed by the latter, together with John Nicodemus, in the following terms: “This bill bindeth us, John-Nicodemus and John Potter, of Washington township, Franklin…

Read the full summary

IN ERROR. On a writ of error to the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin county, it appeared that David Desore and Henry Miller, executors of Frederick Nicodemus, deceased, the plaintiffs in error, brought this suit against the defendant in error, Daniel Potter, executor of John Potter, deceased, on a penal bill executed by the latter, together with John Nicodemus, in the following terms: “This bill bindeth us, John-Nicodemus and John Potter, of Washington township, Franklin county, and state of Pennsylvania, in the sum of one thousand dollars lawful money of Pennsylvania, to be paid unto…

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Duncan, J.

The most material question, and, from the view of .the subject taken by the court, the only one, is, — Was the penal bijl, on which.this action was brought, joint only, or joint and several ?

It is not possible to distinguish this ease from Moneugh v. Butler’s Administrators, decided by this court. In that case, the words were, — “We bind our heirs, executors and administrators, and each of our heirs, executors, and administrators;” in this, instead of each, it is every of them. All of them would have been joint, every of them is several; and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hunt v. Rousmanier's AdministratorsSupreme Court of the United States · 1823
  2. Gillespie v. MoonNew York Court of Chancery · 1817
  3. Martin v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1812

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Wood v. HummelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1835
  2. Klapp v. KlecknerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1842

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API