Lower & Barron v. Clement
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Northumberland county. Defendant being engaged in mercantile business became indebted to plaintiffs, merchants in Philadelphia, and other merchants of the same place. On the 27th January, 1848, defendant gave to plaintiffs three promissory notes at six, twelve, and eighteen months, amounting in the whole to $598.58. On the 9th August, 1848, Clement wrote to plaintiffs that he could not meet his liabilities, and proposed a compromise.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Northumberland county. Defendant being engaged in mercantile business became indebted to plaintiffs, merchants in Philadelphia, and other merchants of the same place. On the 27th January, 1848, defendant gave to plaintiffs three promissory notes at six, twelve, and eighteen months, amounting in the whole to $598.58. On the 9th August, 1848, Clement wrote to plaintiffs that he could not meet his liabilities, and proposed a compromise. On the 11th August, plaintiffs sent the above notes to Mr. Packer for collection. In the same month Clement proposed the following…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Woodward, J.
This was an action on promissory notes, the execution of which being admitted, the plaintiffs’ case was made out, when they were put in evidence.
The defence was, that the plaintiffs had compounded with the defendant, and released him from liability on the notes in suit, in consideration of other notes with approved security, for fifty per cent, of the debt, at twelve and eighteen months, and his own note for twenty-five per cent, at five years. The defendant was a country merchant, having several Philadelphia creditors, and the instrument…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Herster v. HersterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
- E. R. Artman & Co. v. TrubySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
- Brink v. BradySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909