Caldwell v. Lovett
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Assumpsit by the'promissee against the maker of a promissory note. The note was described as dated the 23d of November, 1812, for $ 66-50, payable in six months with interest. There was also a count on an indebitatus assumpsit for labor ; and another count for money had and received. The cause was tried upon the general issue, before Putnam, J., at the last February term in this county.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit by the'promissee against the maker of a promissory note. The note was described as dated the 23d of November, 1812, for $ 66-50, payable in six months with interest. There was also a count on an indebitatus assumpsit for labor ; and another count for money had and received. The cause was tried upon the general issue, before Putnam, J., at the last February term in this county. To prove the note, (which the plaintiff suggested had been fraudulently obtained by the defendant without payment,) the plaintiff offered J. J■ Fiske, Esq., as a witness. The defendant objected to his…
1Per curiam
An attorney, once having indorsed an original writ, cannot afterwards be discharged, and another substituted in his place, without the consent of the defendant in the suit; for he has acquired a right to his name, as a security for his costs. It is true, in the' case before us, that the security of the defendant was not diminished * by the change. But he cannot be compelled to give up that which he already has. The admission of Mr. Fiske as a witness, he having indorsed the writ, and thereby become eventually liable to the costs of the suit, makes it necessary that a new trial should be…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Snow v. BatchelderMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1851
- Snow v. BatchelderMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1851