Miller v. Eccles
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 186, Oot. T., 1892, by defendant, James M. Eccles, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., Nov. T., 1891, No. 54, on verdict for plaintiff, William S. Miller. Assumpsit on contract of guaranty.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 186, Oot. T., 1892, by defendant, James M. Eccles, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., Nov. T., 1891, No. 54, on verdict for plaintiff, William S. Miller. Assumpsit on contract of guaranty. At the trial, before McClung, J., it appeared that defendant “ guaranteed that Henry M. McLean would well and faithfully perform his part” of a building contract in which McLean agreed to furnish, all labor and material necessary for the building and completion of a dwelling house. The contract in question provided that changes might be made in matters of detail, but that no changes…
1Opinion of the Court
Per, Curiam,
The appellant, James M. Eccles, became the surety of H. L. McLean upon a building contract which the latter had entered into with a Mr. Miller. Upon that contract the appellant indorsed a guarantee that Mr. McLean would well and faithfully perform his part of the contract. The suit below was brought upon that guarantee.
The appellant defends upon two grounds. He contends in the first place that he is not bound, because Mr. Miller paid the money to his contractor more rapidly than he should have done. We fail to see any force in this objection. The contract between Mr. Eccles and…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Leiendecker v. Aetna Indemnity Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1909
- Moon Motel, Inc. v. Sun Insurance, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1964