Hinkley v. Davis
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit on a promissory note, dated October 1, 1825, for $150, made by the defendant, and one Kimball Blood. The cause was tried upon the general issue, at November term, 1832, when it was admitted, that the defendant and Blood made the note, but the defendant, who was only a surety, insisted that Blood, the principal, had paid the note by keeping sheep for the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit on a promissory note, dated October 1, 1825, for $150, made by the defendant, and one Kimball Blood. The cause was tried upon the general issue, at November term, 1832, when it was admitted, that the defendant and Blood made the note, but the defendant, who was only a surety, insisted that Blood, the principal, had paid the note by keeping sheep for the plaintiff. It was not disputed that Blood kept sheep for the plaintiff, and it became material to ascertain the price of the keeping. The plaintiff introduced a witness who swore that Blood, while he was keeping the sheep, said that…
1Opinion of the Court
Richardson, O. J.
delivered the opinion of the court.
The admissions of Blood, in this case, were made at a time when no motive to misrepresent the matter can be conceived. They were admissions against his interest. He is now dead, and cannot be called as a witness ; and his admission related to a matter, with which he must have been well acquainted.
The question is, whether, under these circumstances, the admissions of Blood, the principal, are evidence against the defendant who was only a surety ?
In general, admissions by one man are not evidence against another. But to this there are…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Gordon v. ShurtliffSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1836
- Smith v. SmithSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1844
- Walcott v. KeithSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1850