Harwood v. Johnson
Illinois Supreme Court
Summons issued Oct. 20th, 1856; summons returned by sheriff, served by reading the same to George H. Kiersted, Oct. 20th, 1856, and that John Johnson was not found. The declaration was on a note, dated February 16th, 1856, executed by defendants, and payable to plaintiff, for one hundred and twenty-five dollars, with use.
Read the full summary
Summons issued Oct. 20th, 1856; summons returned by sheriff, served by reading the same to George H. Kiersted, Oct. 20th, 1856, and that John Johnson was not found. The declaration was on a note, dated February 16th, 1856, executed by defendants, and payable to plaintiff, for one hundred and twenty-five dollars, with use. There was a count for goods sold and delivered ; for money lent and advanced to, and paid, laid out, and expended for defendant; for money had and received to and for the use of the plaintiff. Plea, non-assumpsit, by George H. Kiersted, and similiter by plaintiff. Jury find…
1Opinion of the CourtScates, J.
Promises and agreements, as between the parties, to be binding, must be made upon a legal consideration.
And this consideration is equally necessary to support the promise of mere sureties and guarantors. Where the original agreement is that sureties shall sign it, and a guaranty be given, the original consideration between the parties will support the promise of the surety or guarantor. Camden et al. v. McKay et al., 3 Scam. R. 441; Klein v. Currier, 14 Ill. R. 237; Neelson v. Sanborne, 2 N. Hamp. R. 413; Bailey v. Freeman, 11 John. R. 221; Wheelwright v. Moore, 2 Hall R. 148 ; Flagg v.…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Briggs v. Downing & MatthewsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1878
- Cassell v. MorrisonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1881
- Davis v. SmithAppellate Court of Illinois · 1888