Sawyer v. Steele
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania
This was an action of indebitatus assumpsit ■brought by the plaintiffs, the officers of a revenue cutter, against the defendant, the collector at Philadelphia, for money had and received to their use, to recover their proportion of the forfeiture incurred by the Perseverance, for a breach of the non-intercourse law. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiffs, subject to the opinion of the court, upon the question; whether the plaintiffs can join in the action.
1Opinion of the Court
WASHINGTON, Circuit Justice.
The rule of law applicable to this subject, is laid down in Slingshy’s Case, 5 Coke, 19, which has never been departed from, to my knowledge. It is, that where the grantees are to take, a joint interest in the thing granted, they must join in the action, although the covenant is made with them severally; and the reason assigned is, that a man cannot, by his covenant, unless in respect of several interests, make it first joint and then several; but if the interests are severed, then the covenant in respect thereof may be several. 1 East, 500. This. rule is universal…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Southeastern Greyhound Lines v. WellsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1949
- Boston & Maine Railroad v. Portland, Saco & Portsmouth RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
- Schwartzman v. Pines Rubber Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919