Carl v. Commonweath
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
IN ERROR. This was a writ ’of error' to the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland county, in án action of debt upon an administration bond, brought in the name of the Commonwealth against Isaiah Carl, George Snyder, Christian Hickendom, and Samuel Ickesi.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. This was a writ ’of error' to the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland county, in án action of debt upon an administration bond, brought in the name of the Commonwealth against Isaiah Carl, George Snyder, Christian Hickendom, and Samuel Ickesi. The declaration was upon a bond executed by the defendants, on the 4th January, 1814, in the sum of 3000 dollars, and stated, that the defendants acknowleged themselves bound in the said sum, “to be paid to the said commonwealth,- when they the said Isaiah Carl, George Snyder, Christian Hickendom, should be thereunto afterwards required.” The…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
GibsoN, J.
The first exception is to the declaration, which is on an office bond given by administrators and their sureties. The debt is laid as being that of all the four defendants ; but as being payable when three of the obligors who are named, (omitting the name of the fourth,) “should be thereunto afterwards required.” I can see no error in this. A bond by four may be good, although expressly made payable when three of them should be required; and if so, a declaration setting it forth truly, would also be good.
The defendants craved oyer of the bond…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Sauerman v. WeckerlySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1827