Horback v. Reeside
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
This case came before the court upon a motion for a new trial. The action was assumpsit, brought by Abraham Horback to the use of Knox, Boggs, & Co., against James Reeside. The declaration contained the common money counts. On the trial before Rogers, J. at a Court of Nisi Prius, held in Philadelphia on the 22d of Nov. 1839, the plaintiff’s counsel opened that the action was brought to recover money paid by the plaintiff for the use of the defendant.
Read the full summary
This case came before the court upon a motion for a new trial. The action was assumpsit, brought by Abraham Horback to the use of Knox, Boggs, & Co., against James Reeside. The declaration contained the common money counts. On the trial before Rogers, J. at a Court of Nisi Prius, held in Philadelphia on the 22d of Nov. 1839, the plaintiff’s counsel opened that the action was brought to recover money paid by the plaintiff for the use of the defendant. It appeared that the defendant, who was a contractor for carrying the mail, had drawn a bill upon the Post Master General for $5000, which had…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Sergeant, J.
The former suit of Knox & Boggs v. Reeside, (2 Whart. 233,) failed because the bill being drawn on the government, *52was not a negotiable instrument. This suit is free from that objection, being indebitatus assumpsit for money paid to the defendant’s use by the plaintiff. The facts appear to be, that Reeside, being the contractor for carrying the mail from Philadelphia, to Wheeling, became indebted to the plaintiff and others as sub-contractors for carrying the mail on the western part of the route, and in order to pay them gave them the bill…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Reeside v. KnoxSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1837