Ellmaker's Executors v. Franklin Fire Ins.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In error from the District Court of Philadelphia. Feb. 22, 28 — April 14, 15. This was an action of covenant by defendants in error on a covenant of guaranty by the testator of the plaintiffs in error. . It appeared that on the 11th September, 1834, Wm. M. Bozarth borrowed $4000 from the plaintiffs below,- on a bond and mortgage on a house in Filbert street.
Read the full summary
In error from the District Court of Philadelphia. Feb. 22, 28 — April 14, 15. This was an action of covenant by defendants in error on a covenant of guaranty by the testator of the plaintiffs in error. . It appeared that on the 11th September, 1834, Wm. M. Bozarth borrowed $4000 from the plaintiffs below,- on a bond and mortgage on a house in Filbert street. By a deed dated the 13th September, reciting the bond and mortgage, “ and that the said sum was lent to W. M. B..on condition of the guaranty of L. Ellmaker,” in consL deration thereof Ellmaker covenanted that in case the said messuage…
1Opinion of the CourtRogers, J.
In the course of the trial, the defendant offered to prove a contract between Wm. M. Bozarth and the Franklin Eire Insurance Company, by which Wm. M. Bozarth was to bo permitted to make sale of the mortgaged property for an amount more than sufficient to pay the debt due by him to the company, guarantied by Ellmaker, with interest. That while this contract was in force, the company, without notice, violated the contract, and sold the property to a third person, for a sum sufficient to pay the debt and interest. This was objected to, “1. Because there was no consideration for the contract.”…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bender v. FrombergerSupreme Court of the United States · 1806
- Wright v. SmythSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1842
- Robinson v. EldridgeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1823
- Hawk v. GeddisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1827
3Cited by1 opinion
- New Amsterdam Building & Loan Ass'n v. MoyermanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928