Jenkins v. De Groot
Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors
THIS was an appeal from Chancery, in which the facts appeared to be these: James Goslin, jun. John Goslin, and Peter De Groot, made their joint promissory note for £133 is- 2d. payable to the appellants four months after date. Peter De Groot died intestate.
Read the full summary
THIS was an appeal from Chancery, in which the facts appeared to be these: James Goslin, jun. John Goslin, and Peter De Groot, made their joint promissory note for £133 is- 2d. payable to the appellants four months after date. Peter De Groot died intestate. The appellants prosecuted the surviving- makers of the note to judgment, issued into the county where they resided a ii. fa. which was returned nulla Bona, and they have since become insolvent, but the respondent has sufficient assets from the intestate to satisfy the debt. The bill prayed that the respondent might be compelled to pay the…
1Opinion of the CourtPer curiam delivered by Thompson, J.
The facts stated in the bill, are admitted by the demurrer to be true. The only question, therefore, presented to the court, is, whether, where three persons make a promissory note, one dies intestate, but solvent, and the two survivors become insolvent, the estate of the deceased can in equity be charged with the payment of the note ? I have not been able to discover any principles of justice on which it can be exonerated. It is a rule applicable to proceedings in courts of law, that where two are jointly bound, and one dies, the survivor must be prosecuted, and an action cannot be…
2Cited by2 opinions
- New Haven & Northampton Co. v. HaydenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
- Landau v. LevyThe Superior Court of New York City · 1855