The Hartwell Richards Co. v. Moss
Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Assumpsit on a guaranty. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtTillinghast, J.
There is considerable conflict in the authorities as to the rule to be applied in the construction of guaranties. One line of cases holds that in order to hold a guaranty to be a continuing one, it must clearly appear from the language used that such was the intention of the parties. Thus, in Cremer v. Higginson, 1 Mason, 323, Judge Story says that in any doubtful case the presumption ought to be against holding a guaranty to be continuing. In Melville v. Hayden, 3 B. & Ald. 593, Best, C. J., says: “It ought to appear unequivocally that it was the intention of the defendant to. guarantee…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Belloni v. . FreebornNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Cremer v. HigginsonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1817
- White v. ReedSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1843
3Cited by4 opinions
- Bank of United States v. Chemical Bank & Trust Co.New York Supreme Court · 1930
- Goodhue County National Bank v. FlemingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Dondero v. Standard Emblem CompanySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1923
- Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Bob Jones Enterprises, Inc.District Court, D. Colorado · 1965