Lent v. Padelford
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tiie plaintiffs declared, in case that a certain writ of execution in their favor, and against one Joseph Barney, was in the hands of T. Hinsdale, a deputy sheriff, which the said Barney was unable to satisfy; and that the defendant, by his written note, undertook and promised the plaintiffs, in consideration that they would delay the service of said execution until the first Monday of June then next; and, in consideration of value received by the defendant of said Barney,…
Read the full summary
Tiie plaintiffs declared, in case that a certain writ of execution in their favor, and against one Joseph Barney, was in the hands of T. Hinsdale, a deputy sheriff, which the said Barney was unable to satisfy; and that the defendant, by his written note, undertook and promised the plaintiffs, in consideration that they would delay the service of said execution until the first Monday of June then next; and, in consideration of value received by the defendant of said Barney, that the said Barney should make his appearance and be ready at Pittsfield, at the tavern of J. M., either to pay said…
1Opinion of the CourtJackson, J.
The Court have heard both these motions together, for the convenience of the parties, and to prevent delay.
The first point to be considered, in the motion for a new trial, is the supposed variance between the declaration and the writing pro duced in evidence. It is never necessary to declare in the precise words of a written promise. It is always allowable, and often necessary, to declare according to their legal effect and import, † In the present case, we have no doubt that the promises contained in the writing were made to the plaintiffs. They are the only persons *240interested in the subject…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Leonard v. VredenburghNew York Supreme Court · 1811
- Violett v. PattonSupreme Court of the United States · 1809
- Sage v. WilcoxSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1826
- Traver v. HalstedNew York Supreme Court · 1840
- Carroll v. PeakeSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by46 opinions
- Choate, Hall & Stewart v. SCA Services, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979
- York v. SullivanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
- Breed v. HillhouseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1829
- Atlas Shoe Co. v. BloomMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Steadman v. GuthrieCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1862
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.