Owen v. Long
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Conteact upon a negotiable promissory note for $190, dated August 21, 1872, and signed by the defendant Gammon, as principal, and by the other defendants as sureties.
Read the full summary
Conteact upon a negotiable promissory note for $190, dated August 21, 1872, and signed by the defendant Gammon, as principal, and by the other defendants as sureties. The writ was dated February 20, 1873. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Allen, J., Long relied upon the defence, that, at the time he signed the note, he was a minor, and contended that he became twenty-one years of age February 11, 1873. The plaintiff testified, against Long’s objection, that, two or three days before the commencement of the action, he had a conversation with Long which tended to show that he, Long, at…
1Opinion of the CourtGray, C. J.
It cannot be held as matter of law that to sign a promissory note as surety is necessarily not beneficial to an infant. It may or may not be beneficial to him, according to the actual circumstances of the transaction; and, at the trial of this case, there was some evidence that the defendant at the time of signing the note in suit expected to receive, and did afterwards actually receive, some benefit from so doing. As his contract might be beneficial to him, it was not absolutely void, but only voidable, and would be made binding on him by a direct promise to pay the note, after coming of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Whitney v. DutchMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1817
- Bradford v. FrenchMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
3Cited by6 opinions
- Bestor v. HickeySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1898
- King v. CordreySuperior Court of Delaware · 1935
- Helland v. Colton State BankSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1906
- Manning v. GannonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1915
- Anderson v. SowardOhio Supreme Court · 1883
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.