Smith v. Lusher
Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors
On error from the Supreme Court. The action in the court below was assumpsit by the defendant in error, against the plaintiffs in error, as makers of a promissory note. The declaration was of August term, 1820, against P. Smith and Soulden, being in custody, &c. and Van Santvoord, P. Sken.
Read the full summary
On error from the Supreme Court. The action in the court below was assumpsit by the defendant in error, against the plaintiffs in error, as makers of a promissory note. The declaration was of August term, 1820, against P. Smith and Soulden, being in custody, &c. and Van Santvoord, P. Sken. Smith, and the Tracks, returned by the sheriff not found ; and the first count was, for that whereas the defendants below, being merchants and co-partners in trade and merchandize, and the business of merchants and traders exercising and carrying on, under the name, style and firm of William Soulden & Co.…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
Many parts of this record are not here in question; and the cause is now to be determined upon those pleadings of the parties which terminated in a demurrer. In considering the questions before the court, I shall apply the terms plaintiffs and defendants, to the parties, as they stood before the Supreme Court.
The declaration alleges, that the defendants were partners in trade, under the firm of William Soulden and company ; that as partners, they made a promissory note payable to Abraham Van Santvoord; and that Van Santvoord endorsed the note to the plaintiffs.
The special plea…
2Cited by19 opinions
- Lane v. KrekleSupreme Court of Iowa · 1867
- Harrell v. HillSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1857
- Willis v. BarronSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- Carpenter v. GreenopMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- Kipp v. McChesneyIllinois Supreme Court · 1872
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.