Bank v. Klingensmith
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the common pleas of Westmoreland county. The Westmoreland Bank against John B. Williams, Robert Story and John Klingensmith. Scire facias post annum et diem. Plea, payment with leave, &c. Replication, non solvit.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the common pleas of Westmoreland county. The Westmoreland Bank against John B. Williams, Robert Story and John Klingensmith. Scire facias post annum et diem. Plea, payment with leave, &c. Replication, non solvit. This scire facias was brought to revive a judgment which was originally had against J. B. Williams, Robert Story and the present defendant. ‘ That judgment was obtained upon a note discounted in the bank, in which Williams was the drawer, Story was first indorser, and defendant the second indorser. The money obtained for this note was for the joint benefit of Williams and…
1Per curiam
It was not indispensable to show that (he defendant, Klingensmith, could certainly have saved himself, had not his efforts been relaxed by the bank’s verbal release. Deprivation of the chance of doing so was a prejudice to him, and consequently a consideration for the promise to exonerate him. It is impossible to say what he might not have effected, had not the bank refused him the assistance of its process. The declaration that it would not look to him in any event was an agreement; and the relinquishment of his chance of indemnity was a valuable consideration for it. The court…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Brubaker v. OkesonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1860
- Hickok v. Farmers' & Mechanics' BankSupreme Court of Vermont · 1863
- Spalding v. Bank of Susquehanna CountySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1848