Tooker v. Bennett
New York Supreme Court
ASSUMPSIT against the defendants as joint makers of a promissory note, from which Bennett had been exonerated under act for giving relief in cases of insolvency. The defendants served in their pleas, Bennett pleading his discharge, and Tooker giving notice that he should insist on that discharge, in bar of the suit against himself. The only question made, and now submitted without argument was, whether the discharge of the one would operate as a release to both?
1Opinion of the Court
*5jPer curiam delivered by
Livingston J.
We perceive no difficulty in this case. By the proceedings under the “ Act for giving re“lief in cases of Insolvency,” Bennett is discharged from “all “debts due at the time of the assignment of his estate, or “contracted for, before that time, though payable afterwards, "and if in prison, from imprisonment,,” now as a joint debt is the debt of each, as well as of all of the partners, he is absolved from such a demand as well as from every other. This is the case in England under the bankrupt laws ; for, although the statutes on this subject say nothing of…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Hartness v. ThompsonNew York Supreme Court · 1809
- Sheldon v. KibbeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1819
- Gourley v. TylerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1891
- Harrison v. McCormickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Ames v. WilkinsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.