Commonwealth v. Simonton
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
APPEAL from the circuit court of Dauphin county, held by Justice Huston. John W. Simonton, the defendant’s intestate, entered into a recognizance in the orphan’s court of Dauphin county as the surety of John M’Cord, who was the guardian of Peggy Rudy, on the 11th of September 1820 ; the condition of which was, “ that if the said John M’Cord, guardian of Jonas and Peggy Rudy, should do and perform all things required by law of him as guardian as aforesaid, and shall…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the circuit court of Dauphin county, held by Justice Huston. John W. Simonton, the defendant’s intestate, entered into a recognizance in the orphan’s court of Dauphin county as the surety of John M’Cord, who was the guardian of Peggy Rudy, on the 11th of September 1820 ; the condition of which was, “ that if the said John M’Cord, guardian of Jonas and Peggy Rudy, should do and perform all things required by law of him as guardian as aforesaid, and shall faithfully account with said minors, and pay over all such sums of money as may have come or shall come to his hands as guardian,…
1Per curiam
(Rogers, J. dissenting)—The scire facias itself is an imperfect, and, perhaps, fatally defective statement of the cause of action; but our inquiry has been directed, by the point raised, exclusively to the merits of the case, as it appeared on the evidence. The defendant, being a surety, is not liable beyond the extent of his engagement; in other words, he is not answerable for every thing that happens to be a moral duty of his principal. His engagement here, as appears from the condition of the recognizance set out- in the writ, was, that the principal would “ do and *313perform all the things…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Hibbs v. RueSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1846