Terrell v. Smith
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action of assumpsit, brought on the guaranty of a promissory note, made by Garry H. Wheeler, dated October 31st, 1827, payable to Hiram Terrell, the plaintiff, sixty days after date.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, brought on the guaranty of a promissory note, made by Garry H. Wheeler, dated October 31st, 1827, payable to Hiram Terrell, the plaintiff, sixty days after date. The guaranty was thus stated in the declaration: "To secure the payment of said note to the plaintiff, the defendant, by his indorsement thereon, under his hand, and by him delivered to the plaintiff, dated on said 31st of October 1827, promised the plaintiff, for value received, that the said note should be good and collectable for ninety days from the said date.” The declaration then averred, that…
1Opinion of the CourtBissell, J.
As to the first ground of a new trial, it has been contended, that the discharge of Wheeler on the execution, is, in law, a satisfaction of the debt; and the principal being discharged, the surety is, of course, discharged. It would be somewhat extraordinary, if it were to be held, that an act done by the advice of the defendant and for his benefit, were to have the effect of discharging him from his liability; and that contrary to the apparent intention of both parties. For, it ought to be remarked, that the object of committing Wheeler to prison, was, to fix beyond a question the liability…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Loomis v. StorrsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1822
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bridgeport-City Trust Co. v. HirschSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
- Mosaic Tile Co. v. JonesSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1933