Legal Opinion

Taylor v. Claypool

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 29, 1841PublishedCited by 3 opinions

ERROR to the Franklin Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtBlackford, J.

Taylor brought an action of assumpsit against 'William H. Moseley and William W. Claypool, on a joint promissory note. The writ was returned non est inventus as to Moseley. Claypool appeared and pleaded as follows: That the plaintiff hei'etofore, &c., impleaded the defendant and Moseley, &c., for not performing the same promises, &c.; and that the plaintiff in that suit (it being suggested that the writ had been served on Moseley and not on Claypool) obtained a judgment against Moseley for the amount due, &c. General demurrer to the plea, and judgment for the defendant.

This is a joint action…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Sheehy v. Mandeville & JamessonSupreme Court of the United States · 1810
  2. Robertson v. SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1821

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Kennard v. CarterIndiana Supreme Court · 1878
  2. Brady v. ReynoldsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
  3. Carter v. BerkshireIndiana Supreme Court · 1846

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

Powered by the Exa API