Legal Opinion

Hunt v. Smith

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1837PublishedCited by 9 opinions

This was an action of assumpsit, tried at the Oneida circuit in April, 1834, before the Hon. Essex Cowe.v, then one of the circuit judges. This suit was on a guaranty signed by the defendant and addressed to the plaintiff in these words: “ You may let the bearer, Mr. Horace Putnam, have, in such articles as he may want out of your store, to the amount of seventy dollars, if he wishes to get that amount, and 1 will be accountable to you for that sum.

Read the full summary

This was an action of assumpsit, tried at the Oneida circuit in April, 1834, before the Hon. Essex Cowe.v, then one of the circuit judges. This suit was on a guaranty signed by the defendant and addressed to the plaintiff in these words: “ You may let the bearer, Mr. Horace Putnam, have, in such articles as he may want out of your store, to the amount of seventy dollars, if he wishes to get that amount, and 1 will be accountable to you for that sum. Have the goodness to send the amount of his bill by him to me. July 2, 1833.” On the day succeeding the date of the guaranty, Putnam obtained…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court,

Cowen, J.

It appears to me that here was in the outset a fatal departure from the terms of the guaranty. The defendant undertakes to be accountable for goods to §70, and directs a bills to [180] be sent. The delivery is of goods to $102-81, on a note of the vendee at thirty days. I can not understand the engagement otherwise than as an undertaking to pay presently, or at least as reserving the right to pay presently the bill of $70. That would give a remedy over against the principal instantly, either for money paid, or, if any better, a right to insist on a direct and immediate…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Miller v. StewartSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
  2. Wright v. JohnsonNew York Supreme Court · 1832

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Mamerow v. National Lead Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Friend v. Smith Gin Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1894
  3. Bigelow v. BentonNew York Supreme Court · 1852
  4. Walrath v. ThompsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1849
  5. Bishop Press Co. v. LoweCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1919

4 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