Stone v. Chamberlin & Bancroft
Supreme Court of Georgia
Assumpsit, in Muscogee. Tried before Judge Worrill, December adjourned Term, 1856. Chamberlin & Bancroft brought their action against the firm of Stone & Johnson, to recover a sum of money due upon .a promissory note. The declaration also contained a count for the bill of goods for which the original note (of which the one sued on was in renewal) was given.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, in Muscogee. Tried before Judge Worrill, December adjourned Term, 1856. Chamberlin & Bancroft brought their action against the firm of Stone & Johnson, to recover a sum of money due upon .a promissory note. The declaration also contained a count for the bill of goods for which the original note (of which the one sued on was in renewal) was given. Johnson, one of the defendants, was not served, and the action proceeded against Stone, as one of the partners; who plead the renewal of the, note sued on by his partner, after dissolution, as a discharge •of the debt as to him. Upon the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Lumpkin, J.
delivering the opinion.
[1.] In our judgment, the charge requested of the Court— and which he refused to give — states correctly the law of this case, namely: that if the Jury believed, from the testimony, that the note sued on was given. in renewal of the original note of Stone & Johnson, and after the firm was dissolved, plaintiffs knowing the dissolution at the time they took the note, and it was given by Johnson alone, and without the. knowledge and consent of Stone, then Stone is discharged from all liability, both upon the note, and also upon the original bill of…
2Cited by9 opinions
- First National Bank v. CodySupreme Court of Georgia · 1894
- Stapler v. AndersonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1933
- Preston v. GarrardSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
- Ennis v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1860
- Grubbe v. PierceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1914
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.