Marshall v. Baker
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Assumpsit on a note for $26,98, payable to the plaintiff or order, dated Aug. 14, 1830, in one year from date with interest, and signed by said Baker and Eben Vose. To this note there was a subscribing witness. Plea, the general issue. By-leave of Court, the name of Vose was stricken out of the writ, there having been no service on him.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit on a note for $26,98, payable to the plaintiff or order, dated Aug. 14, 1830, in one year from date with interest, and signed by said Baker and Eben Vose. To this note there was a subscribing witness. Plea, the general issue. By-leave of Court, the name of Vose was stricken out of the writ, there having been no service on him. The defendant introduced a receipt of the following tenor : “ Hallowell, 9 Sept. 1830. Rec’d of Thomas Arnold ten dollars in part of the amount which I paid as his bail in the action in favor of Brooks & Means against him. Also, four dollars in part of the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Shepley J.
The witness, Cutler, states, that the promissory note in suit, was made by Ebenezer Vose and the defendant, as his surety, to the plaintiff to secure him for money which he had paid as bail for Thomas Arnold. Whether the plaintiff became bail at the request of Vose, and received the note for the whole, amount paid, or only jointly with Vose at the request of Arnold, and received the note for the half, which .Vose should have paid, the case does not clearly state. The testimony of Cutler would seem rather to favor the former supposition, for…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Innis v. BollerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- Putnam Foundry & MacHine Co. v. CanfieldSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1904
- Carr v. GaleU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine · 1847