Anderson v. Poindexter
Ohio Supreme Court
In error to the district court of Clermont county. The action below was assumpsit, brought to recover the amount of two promissory notes given to the plaintiff, dated August 22, 1848, each for $100, one payable in two, and the other in three years-after date. Poindexter was the principal in the notes, and Thomas C. G-owdy, Jackson "White, and Francis Donaldson were sureties.
Read the full summary
In error to the district court of Clermont county. The action below was assumpsit, brought to recover the amount of two promissory notes given to the plaintiff, dated August 22, 1848, each for $100, one payable in two, and the other in three years-after date. Poindexter was the principal in the notes, and Thomas C. G-owdy, Jackson "White, and Francis Donaldson were sureties. Poindexter was not served with process, and the suit has been prosecuted against and defended by the sureties. The general issue and two special pleas were filed by the defendants. *The first special plea alleges that the…
1Opinion of the CourtBowen, J.
The defense relied on, to prevent a recovery upon the notes, is a want of consideration to support them. The defendants have shaped their pleas and their evidence with a view of pro•senting that question to our consideration in its true aspect. There being no dispute as to the facts which induced the giving of the notes, we may proceed at once to an examination of the points which naturally arise out of those facts.
The plaintiff claimed that Poindexter was his slave, and agreed to set him free for four hundred dollars, secured by the notes of the defendants. It is fair to infer that the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Combs v. Jefferson Pond Draining Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1860
- Davis v. TingleCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1848
- Jackson v. BullochSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1837
- Dunlap & Collins v. ArcherCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1838
- Marie Louise v. MarotSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1836
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.