Bright v. Carpenter
Ohio Supreme Court
Assumpsit. From Fairfield. The suit is against the defendants as joint makers of a promissory note. Upon non-assumpsit the following note was offered in evidence : $290, Lancaster, Ohio, July 27th, 1838. Ninety days after date, I promise to pay to the order of E. Bright, at the bank of Cleveland, Ohio, two hundred and ninety ^dollars, value received. G. Carpenter.” On the back of the note the name of “ C. Sehuer,” is endorsed in blank.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. From Fairfield. The suit is against the defendants as joint makers of a promissory note. Upon non-assumpsit the following note was offered in evidence : $290, Lancaster, Ohio, July 27th, 1838. Ninety days after date, I promise to pay to the order of E. Bright, at the bank of Cleveland, Ohio, two hundred and ninety ^dollars, value received. G. Carpenter.” On the back of the note the name of “ C. Sehuer,” is endorsed in blank. The defendants objected to. this evidence, on the ground that it was only the note of Carpenter, Sehuer being only a guarantor. The plaintiff then offered to…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Lane, C. J.
The plaintiff can not recover under this form of declaration, except by showing that Carpenter and Schuer are joint makers of the note given in evidence. He insists that proof of (his fact is presumed by the form in which they became a party, especially when accompanied with the proposed testimony showing that Schuer intended to become a surety, and repelling the presump*139tion of his being an endorser. The defendants rely upon ¿the form of the paper as constituting a guaranty or collateral undertaking by Schuer; which being in writing or implied by law, can not be…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hunt v. AdamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809
- Dean v. HallNew York Supreme Court · 1837
- Hemmenway v. StoneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810
3Cited by3 opinions
- Justus Gale's Administratrix v. Van Arman & HopkinsOhio Supreme Court · 1849
- Dibble v. DuncanU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Ohio · 1841
- John F. Seymour & Co. v. MickeyOhio Supreme Court · 1864