Prescott v. Perkins
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit for money paid, laid out, and expended, &c. The plaintiff’s specification set out a note dated September 23, 1839, signed by I. 33. H. Odióme as principal, and by Joseph Hanson and the plaintiff and defendants as sureties, made payable to the Strafford Bank in sixty days, for $860, and interest; and that the plaintiff had paid on said note the sums indorsed thereon, the note being fully paid.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit for money paid, laid out, and expended, &c. The plaintiff’s specification set out a note dated September 23, 1839, signed by I. 33. H. Odióme as principal, and by Joseph Hanson and the plaintiff and defendants as sureties, made payable to the Strafford Bank in sixty days, for $860, and interest; and that the plaintiff had paid on said note the sums indorsed thereon, the note being fully paid. The evidence tended to show that Odiorne as principal, and the plaintiff and Hanson as sureties, on the 4th of September 1887, gave a note to Bartlett and others of Boston, for $800, on…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
It does not appear whether the goods attached were at the time the property of Odióme or the plaintiff. They had belonged to Odiorne, who was principal on the first note.
Nor does it appear at whose request the defendant receipted the goods; nor, by any express evidence, at whose request he signed the note.
*310The goods having been receipted for, went into the hands of Odiorne or the plaintiff. They were sold by Odiorne to the plaintiff before or after the attachment.
The plaintiff’ can not treat the attachment as a satisfaction of the debt, or as a release of himself. Bank v. Hallet, 8 Cowen 192.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Harris v. WarnerNew York Supreme Court · 1835
- Lapham v. BarnesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1828
- Beaman v. BlanchardNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Page v. WebsterSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1839
- Elmendorph v. TappenNew York Supreme Court · 1809