Fuller v. McDonald
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
This was an action of assumpsit by the indorsee against the administrator of the late Gen, John MlDonald as indorser of a promissory note, of the following tenor: — •“Umerick, April 8, 1820. For value received I promise to pay John McDonald or his order three hundred and twenty-one dollars and forty-six cents on demand with interest. Davenport Tucker.”
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit by the indorsee against the administrator of the late Gen, John MlDonald as indorser of a promissory note, of the following tenor: — •“Umerick, April 8, 1820. For value received I promise to pay John McDonald or his order three hundred and twenty-one dollars and forty-six cents on demand with interest. Davenport Tucker.” At tile bottom of the note was the following memorandum; — “ The indorser guarantees the eventual payment of the above note.” — On the back were these indorsements; — “ 20 April 1820,pr. receipt — Received one hundred dollars, and a receipt…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was read at the next September term in Alfred, as drawn up by
Weston J.
The deposition of James Means, and the first deposition of Robert M. Barnard ; also a memorandum signed by tho defendant, and another by Earl Sturtevant, used at the trial, were objected to by the counsel for the defendant. The first deposition of Barnard, taken by itself might be liable to objection, as it justified tho inference that he was interested in the suit, and ultimately to bo benefited by it, if tho plaintiff prevailed. But laying his deposition out of the case, the same facts are…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Glaze v. FergusonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1892
- Hibbard v. RussellSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1844
- McMonigal v. BrownOhio Supreme Court · 1888