Warring v. Williams
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action of debt upon an agreement declared on as being under seal and as made jointly and severally by the defendant and Elijah K. Williams and King Williams. The breach alleged was the non-payment of certain promissory notes due from the company of Warring & Williams to Sylvanus Foot, and a small debt due to Cyrus Williams, which notes and debt have been paid by the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
This was an action of debt upon an agreement declared on as being under seal and as made jointly and severally by the defendant and Elijah K. Williams and King Williams. The breach alleged was the non-payment of certain promissory notes due from the company of Warring & Williams to Sylvanus Foot, and a small debt due to Cyrus Williams, which notes and debt have been paid by the plaintiff. The defendant pleaded non est factum, and that the plaintiff had been indemnified according to the tenor of the agreement. Issue was joined on these pleas. The case was tried before Parker C. J. On the first…
1Opinion of the Court
Parker C. J.
delivered the opinion of the Court. The instrument produced by the plaintiff, to prove the issue on the plea of non est factum, purports to be a joint and several obli*334gation of the defendant and two others, with a seal affixed to the name of each ; but the words “jointly and severally ” are not in the body of the deed, except by interlineation ; and the subscribing witness testifies, that at the time of his subscription, these words were not contained in the instrument; nor were there any seals attached to it. The same witness and another testify, that at the time when the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Jackson v. OsbornNew York Supreme Court · 1829
- Barrington v. Bank of WashingtonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1826
- Heffelfinger v. ShutzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1827