Ashley v. Willard

Supreme Court of Vermont

Ashley v. Willard

2 Tyl. 391

Supreme Court of Vermont·Decided February 15, 1803·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Sed per Curiam.

The joint promisors to a note are copartners in the contract, and the payment of [392] one is the payment of both. If the promisee is indebted to both or either, they may join in a declaration in set-off, and have several counts; some applicable to the demands of one, and-some to the demands of the other; or entirely to the demands of 'one, or the joint demands of both.

Cephas Smith, Junior, for the plaintiff. Chauncey Langdon, for defendant.

Plaintiff nonsuited.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Sed per Curiam.

The joint promisors to a note are copartners in the contract, and the payment of [392] one is the payment of both. If the promisee is indebted to both or either, they may join in a declaration in set-off, and have several counts; some applicable to the demands of one, and-some to the demands of the other; or entirely to the demands of 'one, or the joint demands of both.

Cephas Smith, Junior, for the plaintiff. Chauncey Langdon, for defendant.

Plaintiff nonsuited.

Ashley v. Willard, 2 Tyl. 391 (Vt. 1803).

Pincite

2 Tyl. 391 (Ashley v. Willard) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related