Hotchkiss v. Barnes
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Assumpsit, on a guaranty given by the defendant for the payment for goods sold by the plaintiff to one J. L. Day, brought to the superior court in New Haven county. By the bill of particulars it appeared that a large part of the articles sold was spirituous liquors. The defendant pleaded the general issue, with notice that he should claim that he was not liable upon his guaranty for the liquors sold, such sale being prohibited by law.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, on a guaranty given by the defendant for the payment for goods sold by the plaintiff to one J. L. Day, brought to the superior court in New Haven county. By the bill of particulars it appeared that a large part of the articles sold was spirituous liquors. The defendant pleaded the general issue, with notice that he should claim that he was not liable upon his guaranty for the liquors sold, such sale being prohibited by law. The issue was closed to the court and the case tried before Phelps, J. The following facts wepe found by the court. On the 2d day of January, 1858, the…
1Opinion of the CourtPark, J.
This suit is based upon the following letter of credit addressed by the defendant to the plaintiff:—
“Fair Haven, January 2, 1858.
“ Mr. A. P. Hotchkiss : — Sir. You can let Mr. J. L. Day have what goods he calls for and I will see that the same are settled for. Yours truly, H. S. Barnes.”
The first question in controversy between the parties is, whether this instrument is a continuing guaranty or whether it applies only to the first item in the plaintiff’s bill.
The books are full of reported cases upon the subject of commercial guaranties. The decisions are not uniform in the conclusions…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Peisch v. DicksonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1815
- White v. ReedSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1843
- Lewis v. DwightSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1834
- Ely v. AdamsNew York Supreme Court · 1822
- Hall v. RandSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1831
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- In re Curtis & Castle ArbitrationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1894
- Manry v. Waxelbaum Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1899
- Gardner v. WatsonTexas Supreme Court · 1890
- Sullivan v. ArcandMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
- Stewart v. Knight & Jillson Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1906
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.