Bailey v. Freeman

11 Johns. 221
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedAugust 15, 1814
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 11 Johns. 221 (Bailey v. Freeman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bailey v. Freeman, 11 Johns. 221 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1814).

Opinion

Platt, J.

delivered the opinion of the court. The guaranty on the part of the defendant in this case, was an original collateral agreement; and not a promise to pay a previously subsisting debt of Blanche.

It was part of an entire contract consisting of the agreement signed by Blanche, and the guaranty signed by the defendant. The credit was originally given to the defendant as surety; and it was therefore unnecessary to show a separate consideration for the promise of the defendant. The principal contract and guaranty were simultaneous, and the consideration of the former supports the latter. Leonard v. Vredenburgh, (8 Johns. Rep. 29.) Hunt v. Adams, (5 Mass. Rep. 358.)

I think there is a sufficient “ note or memorandum” of the whole agreement, including the consideration, stated in the written agreement to which the guaranty refers; but if no consideration had been expressed in the written agreement , it might be shown by parol proof, because it is only necessary here to prove a consideration for the principal agreement. In the case of Wain v. Warlters, (5 East, 10.) it was held that the considera[224]*224tion as well as the promise must be in writing, in order to charge one man with the debt of another. But th~t was upon a promise to pay an independent previously existing debt of another person, and is plainly distinguishable from this case.

New trial refused.

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

Related

White Sewing Machine Co. v. Fowler
28 Nev. 94 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1904)
Highland v. Dresser
29 N.W. 55 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1886)
Marsh v. Chamberlain
2 Lans. 287 (New York Supreme Court, 1870)
Nabb v. Koontz
17 Md. 283 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1861)
Mallory v. . Gillett
21 N.Y. 412 (New York Court of Appeals, 1860)
Church v. . Brown
21 N.Y. 315 (New York Court of Appeals, 1860)
Dorman v. Bigelow
1 Fla. 281 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1847)
Crozer v. Chambers
20 N.J.L. 256 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1844)
Snevily v. Johnston
1 Watts & Serg. 307 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1841)
Read v. Cutts
7 Me. 186 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1831)
Smith v. Ide
3 Vt. 290 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1830)
Wheelwright v. Moore
1 Hall 201 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1828)
Adams v. Bean
12 Mass. 136 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1815)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
11 Johns. 221, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bailey-v-freeman-nysupct-1814.