Logan v. Williamson
Supreme Court of Arkansas
This was an action of assumpsit, instituted by Williamson against Alonzo C. Sadler, and Matthew T. Logan. The declaration contained three counts.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, instituted by Williamson against Alonzo C. Sadler, and Matthew T. Logan. The declaration contained three counts. The first count set out that Sadler and Logan, on the 15th October, 1838, in consideration that Williamson had sold and delivered to them a horse, at the rate or price of $¡125’, delivered to Williamson a writing obligatory or covenant, executed by one Thomas J. Pax-ton, wherein he promised to pay one Thomas W. Stobaugh, on or before the first day of September, 1838, one hundred and twenty-five dollars in cash notes, by his (Paxton’s) assignment,…
1Opinion of the CourtDickinson, J.
The plaintiff in error contends that the defendant had, by his own acts, released him. The principle is clearly established: That a debt may be paid or extinguished by a third person becoming responsible to the creditor with the concurrence of the debtor. If the creditor grants further indulgence without the knowledge and consent of the debtor, he does it at his peril. Because, as between himself and the debtor, the giving indulgence, without notice, operates as an agreement, on his part, to look to the third person, and discharge the debtor. Chitty on Contracts, 581; Tatlock vs. Harris, 3 T.…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Viser v. BertrandSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1853
- Douglas-Guardian Warehouse Corp. v. NickellDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1964