Burchard v. Dunbar
Illinois Supreme Court
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Kankakee county; the Hon. Hath aniel J. Pillsbury, Judge, presiding. This was assumpsit, by appellee, against appellant and her husband, Patrick H. Burchard, on an instrument in writing, of which the following is a copy: j “$403.44 Hamilton, January 1, 1866. “ For value received, we, jointly and severally, promise to pay A. D. Dunbar, or bearer, $403.44, in three equal annual payments, the first payment to become due January 1, 1867, with…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Kankakee county; the Hon. Hath aniel J. Pillsbury, Judge, presiding. This was assumpsit, by appellee, against appellant and her husband, Patrick H. Burchard, on an instrument in writing, of which the following is a copy: j “$403.44 Hamilton, January 1, 1866. “ For value received, we, jointly and severally, promise to pay A. D. Dunbar, or bearer, $403.44, in three equal annual payments, the first payment to become due January 1, 1867, with annual interest on all sums remaining unpaid, and the whole to become due January 1, 1869. “ The undersigned, Celestia L.…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Scholeield
The instrument on which suit is brought having been executed in the State of Mew York, we must resort to the law of that State to determine the nature of the obligation it imposes on the appellant. Prior to the enactment of recent statutes, and decisions thereunder, it is quite clear there was no substantial difference in the law, in this respect, in the State of New York and this State. Thus, it was held in Yale v. Dederer, 18 N. Y. 265, and 22 id. 454, that the signing of a promissory note by a married woman, as surety for her husband, merely, did not, even in equity, bind her separate…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Yale v. . DedererNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Carpenter v. MitchellIllinois Supreme Court · 1869
- Loomis v. . RuckNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Wood v. ChildIllinois Supreme Court · 1858
3Cited by10 opinions
- Acker v. PriestSupreme Court of Iowa · 1894
- Ruhe v. BuckSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Davis v. DeVaughnCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1910
- Galef v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. South Carolina · 1928
- Lust v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1932
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.