Bank of the United States v. Hatch
United States Circuit Court
At law. This action [by the Bank of the United States] is a scire facias to make the defendant a party to a judgment, which was obtained by the plaintiff against Elijah Pearson. The writ was issued against Pearson and [William S.] Hatch, and being non est as to Hatch, a judgment was entered against Pearson. [Judgment for defendant. This was afterwards affirmed by the supreme court. Bank of U. S. v. Hatch, 6 Pet. (31 U. S.) 250. See note at end of case.]
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT.
This proceeding is authorized by a statute of Ohio, and the defendant is permitted to make any defence which he could have made to the original action.
The jury found a special verdict, which states the facts of the case as follows: “E. Pearson made the bill of exchange, a copy of which is attached to the declaration of Lhe said plaintiff in the original suit against Pearson, the drawer of said bill, and that the said bill was regularly endorsed by the present defendant, Hatch.” “They also find that on the 25th day of July, in the year 1820, said bill of exchange was duly…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kenworthy v. HopkinsNew York Supreme Court · 1799