Church v. Brown
New York Supreme Court
THIS action was brought upon a guaranty indorsed upon an agreement for the sale of goods by the plaintiffs to Thomas White, in these words: “I will be responsible for all such goods as Mr. White shall buy of the Messrs. Church, within one year from date, which shall not be paid for according to the terms of the within contract. July 1, 1852. (Signed) M. Brown.” ■ The guaranty bore even date with the principal agreement, and was executed simultaneously therewith.
Read the full summary
THIS action was brought upon a guaranty indorsed upon an agreement for the sale of goods by the plaintiffs to Thomas White, in these words: “I will be responsible for all such goods as Mr. White shall buy of the Messrs. Church, within one year from date, which shall not be paid for according to the terms of the within contract. July 1, 1852. (Signed) M. Brown.” ■ The guaranty bore even date with the principal agreement, and was executed simultaneously therewith. The action was tried by a referee, who held that the guaranty or agreement of the defendant was a promise to answer for the debt,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, E. Darwin Smith, J.
In the case of Brewster v. Silence, (11 Barb. 144,) this court held that when the legislature expressly declared that “ every special promise to answer for the debt, default or miscarriage of another person, should be void unless such agreement, or some note or memorandum thereof expressing the consideration, be in writing and subscribed by the party to be charged therewith,” it must be deemed to have intended precisely what the language used clearly imports, and that a contract of guaranty, .in which' no consideration was expressed, was void. The same view…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bangs v. McIntoshNew York Supreme Court · 1857
- Brewster v. SilenceNew York Supreme Court · 1851
3Cited by2 opinions
- Dunning v. RobertsNew York Supreme Court · 1862
- Ellenwood v. FultsNew York Supreme Court · 1863