Hubon v. Park
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract upon a promissory note signed by the defendant and payable on demand to the plaintiff. Writ dated March 13, 1872. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Wilkinson, J., the plaintiff put in the note in suit and rested his case.
Read the full summary
Contract upon a promissory note signed by the defendant and payable on demand to the plaintiff. Writ dated March 13, 1872. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Wilkinson, J., the plaintiff put in the note in suit and rested his case. The defendant then offered evidence to prove, which the plaintiff admitted was true, that the consideration of the note was the verba] promise of the plaintiff that he would pay a certain debt of the defendant to two other parties; that the defendant had paid to the plaintiff on March 9, 1872, the sum of $25 on account of the note; and that at the time the…
1Opinion of the CourtGray, C. J.
The promise of the plaintiff to the defendant was not a promise to pay the debt of another, but to pay the defendant’s own debt to a third person, and was not within the statute.of frauds. Alger v. Scoville, 1 Gray, 391, 395. Although it had not been performed before the bringing of this action, it was a sufficient consideration for the defendant’s note to the plaintiff. Gower v. Capper, Cro. Eliz. 543. Nichols v. Raynbred, Hob. 88 b. Hodgkins v. Moulton, 100 Mass. 309. Backus v. Spaulding, ante, 418. Exceptions overruled.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hodgkins v. MoultonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
3Cited by12 opinions
- Locke v. HomerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
- Snow v. AlleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- Broadway National Bank v. HaywardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
- Fowlkes v. LeaMississippi Supreme Court · 1904
- Pelonsky v. WattendorfMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.