Chalfont v. Johnston
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Debt 148I. on bond. Pleas, payment with leave, &c. plene administravit and want of assets. The facts turned out on evidence, as follow. The bond was dated 27th October 1768, conditioned for the payment of 74I. within one year, with legal interest.
Read the full summary
Debt 148I. on bond. Pleas, payment with leave, &c. plene administravit and want of assets. The facts turned out on evidence, as follow. The bond was dated 27th October 1768, conditioned for the payment of 74I. within one year, with legal interest. Ten different sums were indorsed, paid on account of interest, the last bearing date on the 12th October 1780. Robert Johnston, the obligor, made his will on the 26th'July 1769, and thereby appointed Caleb Johnston, the now defendant, and Simon Johnston, since deceased, his executors, and soon afterwards died. Mary Goodwin, the obligee, made her…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Cur.
The testratrix might not have known this fact, but at any rate, if this technical nicety was intended to be insisted on, it should have been pleaded in abatement, like the case of part owners-not sued. 2 Bla. Rep. 696, 947. 5 Burr. 2613. 5 Term Rep. 651. Perhaps it would be difficult, if not imprac*16ticable, to have given the plaintiff a better writ. Caleb Johnston was not compellable to join in the assignment, nor could he be reasonably expected to join in a suit against himself. Under such circumstances, a bill would certainly be supportable in Chancery against the now defendant.…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Pringle v. PringleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
- Johnson v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1874