Roberts v. Adams
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to tito Circuit court of Dallas county. Assumpsit on promises implied. Plaintiff below •declared aghast tire defendant, at the spring term eighteen hundred and thirty-seven of said court, for that whereas said defendant, theretofore, to wit, on a certain day, was indebted to said plaintiff in a large sum of money, by plaintiff, before that time, lent, advanced and paid, laid out and expended, for the said defendant, zt his special instance and request, and that being…
Read the full summary
Error to tito Circuit court of Dallas county. Assumpsit on promises implied. Plaintiff below •declared aghast tire defendant, at the spring term eighteen hundred and thirty-seven of said court, for that whereas said defendant, theretofore, to wit, on a certain day, was indebted to said plaintiff in a large sum of money, by plaintiff, before that time, lent, advanced and paid, laid out and expended, for the said defendant, zt his special instance and request, and that being so indebted, i:i consideration thereof, promised to pay the same when required so to do, and being so requested, had…
1Opinion of the CourtGoldthwaite, J.
This in an action of assump-sit on the common counts; and the only question which is presented for revision, arises out of the bill of exceptions, taken by Roberts on the trial of the cause — by which it appears, that the plaintiff and defendant were the co-sureties for Ross and Roberts, to a promissory note. *363.on which Adams was sued, and compelled to pay. No proof was adduced to show the insolvency of Ross and Roberts. On the evidence, Roberts requested the Circuit court, to instruct the jury, that before Adams could entitle himself to a recovery, the insolvency or inability of Ross and…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Sloo v. PoolIllinois Supreme Court · 1853
- Boyer v. MarshallNew York Supreme Court · 1887