Dobbins v. Bradley

7 F. Cas. 782, 4 D.C. 298, 4 Cranch 298
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia
DecidedMarch 15, 1833
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 7 F. Cas. 782 (Dobbins v. Bradley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dobbins v. Bradley, 7 F. Cas. 782, 4 D.C. 298, 4 Cranch 298 (circtddc 1833).

Opinion

The Court

(Thruston, J., not sitting in this cause, being connected with the defendant,)

stopped the counsel of the defendant, in reply, and

Cranch, C. J., said the case seemed very clear to the Court on both points.

1. The note is not a paper made payable at the Branch Bank at Washington, and, therefore, not within the terms of the guaranty.

2. That the guaranty is neither absolute nor definite, and, therefore, notice ought to have been given in a reasonable time’afier the credit was given.

The plaintiffs had leave to amend their declaration, but after-wards dismissed their suit.

•.■-

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

Related

Gladwell v. Holcomb
60 Ohio St. (N.S.) 427 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1899)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
7 F. Cas. 782, 4 D.C. 298, 4 Cranch 298, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dobbins-v-bradley-circtddc-1833.