Legal Opinion

Hotchkiss v. Lyon

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 6, 1829PublishedCited by 5 opinions

ERROR to the Vigo Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtHolman, J.

Lyon, Allen, and Creal, as the sureties of Burnett, covenanted with Hotchkiss, that said Burnett, whom Hotchkiss had taken as a partner in the business of tanning, should faithfully discharge his duty as such partner, and fully account, &c. with the said Hotchkiss for and during the term of two years from the 11th of January, 1823. To a declaration on this covenant for breaches in the year 1823, the defendants pleaded, among other pleas, that said Burnett did discharge all the duties that they had covenanted that he should discharge, &c.; on which issue was taken. On the trial, as appears by…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Respublica v. DavisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1801

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Indiana University v. Indiana Bonding & Surety Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1981
  2. Hatch v. . ElkinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
  3. King v. State ex rel. HubbleIndiana Supreme Court · 1860
  4. Stetson v. City BankOhio Supreme Court · 1853
  5. United American Fire Insurance Co. v. American Bonding Co. of BaltimoreWisconsin Supreme Court · 1911

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API