Wheeler v. Lewis
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit upon the following guaranty ;— “ Poultney, April 10, 1834. — This certifies that I have .“ this day sold to William Wheeler a note against Samuel “Hamden, of Wells, dated 27th March, 1834, for the sum “ of $51,56, given to me or bearer, which I warrant good “ and collectable until the 1st day of July, 1834, signed by “ Samuel Hamden, of Wells. (Signed) LEVI LEWIS.”
Read the full summary
Assumpsit upon the following guaranty ;— “ Poultney, April 10, 1834. — This certifies that I have .“ this day sold to William Wheeler a note against Samuel “Hamden, of Wells, dated 27th March, 1834, for the sum “ of $51,56, given to me or bearer, which I warrant good “ and collectable until the 1st day of July, 1834, signed by “ Samuel Hamden, of Wells. (Signed) LEVI LEWIS.” It appeared on the trial, by a jury, in the county court, upon the general issue, that on the .12th of April, 1834, the present plaintiff commenced a suit against the maker of said note, which was appealed to tho county…
1Opinion of the Court
*267The opinion of the court was delivered by
Redfíeld, J.
It is now settled law, that upon a guaranty, like the one in question,the person taking the security is bound to resort to legal measures within a reasonable time, and to pursue them with common diligence until the final event is thereby determined ; or else prove, what would make any such resort useless, i. e. the absolute insolvency of the maker of the note.
This was not done in the present case. For, although a suit was seasonably commenced, it was, by the negligence of the plaintiff, or his attorney, suffered to be continued in court one…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Dyer v. GibsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1863
- Allen v. RundleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1882
- Delsman v. FriedlanderOregon Supreme Court · 1901
- Bosman v. AkeleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- Brackett v. RichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1877
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.