Bradford v. Farrand
This text of 13 Mass. 18 (Bradford v. Farrand) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
It has been settled, in the preceding case of Blanchard vs. Russell, that a certificate of discharge, under an insolvent law of another State, is binding here only upon contracts made within the State which enacts the law, or which by the terms of them are to be there performed. The debt in this case must be considered to have arisen within this State ; the bargain from which it arose was made here, and it was not provided that it should be performed in Pennsylvania; although the plaintiff might have applied there for his remedy, if he had seen fit.
Defendant defaulted.
[M'Millan vs. M'Neil, 4 Wheat. 209.— Green vs. Sarmiento, Peters C. C. 75.—Le Roy vs. Crowninshield, 2 Mason, 162. — Blake vs. Williams & Trustee, 6 Pick. 286. — Ed.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
13 Mass. 18, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bradford-v-farrand-mass-1816.