Underwood v. Eastman
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, each action founded upon a promissory note of the defendant, payable to one' "W. W. Gould, or order, and by him indorsed. In the first case the note was also .signed by J. Dustin, who was a surety. Plea, in each, a discharge in bankruptcy. Replication, a new promise after the discharge.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, each action founded upon a promissory note of the defendant, payable to one' "W. W. Gould, or order, and by him indorsed. In the first case the note was also .signed by J. Dustin, who was a surety. Plea, in each, a discharge in bankruptcy. Replication, a new promise after the discharge. The plaintiff, in. the first case, introduced the testimony of W. P. Weeks, that Gould gave him the note declared on, with instructions to procure a new note, or otherwise to collect it; that a few days before the writ was made he called on the defendant, and told him that Dustin was willing to…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
The evidence in the first case shows the express declaration of the defendant, made to the attorney of the creditor, after the discharge in bankruptcy, that he meant to pay the note, and would, and that Dustin, the surety, should not be hurt upon the note. He at the same time refused to give a new note, because he feared it would injure his credit in Boston if he did. This is sufficient evidence of such a new promise to pay as will revive the debt. The refusal to give a new note is not inconsistent with an express promise to pay the existing note.
If the new promise furnished the legal…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Depuy v. SwartNew York Supreme Court · 1829
- Hoit v. UnderhillSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1838
- Orvis v. KimballSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1825