Legal Opinion

Bassett v. Thrall

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 12, 1899No. 3224PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from Superior Court, Lincoln County. — Hon. Chables H. Heal, Judge.

1Per curiam

This is an action upon a promissory note. The appellant was a surety on said note. The record shows that payments had been made on -the note by the *232principal, so that as to him the statute of limitations would not run; but no payments had been made by the surety, and more than six years had elapsed between the maturity of the note and the action upon the same. Judgment was given against both principal and surety. There is absolutely no testimony in this case showing payment or ratification of payments by the appellant; hence the case falls squarely within the rule announced by this court in…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Stubblefield v. McAuliffWashington Supreme Court · 1898

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Arthur & Co. v. BurkeWashington Supreme Court · 1915
  2. Perkins v. JenningsWashington Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Farmers & Mechanics Bank v. San Poil Consolidated Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Van De Ven v. Overlook Mining & Development Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Pederson v. JordanWashington Supreme Court · 1934

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API