Hinds v. David

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Hinds v. David

16 S.C.L. 423

DecidedNovember 15, 1824

StatusPublished

This text of 16 S.C.L. 423 (Hinds v. David) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hinds v. David, 16 S.C.L. 423 (S.C. 1824).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinionof the court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Hug eh.

The act of 1759, authorises a defendant “ to give in evidence by way of discount,” any account “ reckoning, demand, cause, matte> or thing, provided they be mutual.” These words at least embracé credits-. The question then is, did the defendant, by becoming security to the note of the intestate, give him credit. The security would not have been required,had the credit of the intestate been sufficient. It was to give additional credit to the note, that'the defendant signed it. In giving credit to the note he gave credit to the intestate, and it is not improbable that he was induced to do so by the credk already given him by the intestate.

This then is a case of mutual credit, and it is unnecessary to enquire how much more than mutual credit is embraced in the words of our discount act. See the case' of Assignees of Vaughn, vs. Smith, 3 T. R. 507, n. The motion is granted.'

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

The opinionof the court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Hug eh.

The act of 1759, authorises a defendant “ to give in evidence by way of discount,” any account “ reckoning, demand, cause, matte> or thing, provided they be mutual.” These words at least embracé credits-. The question then is, did the defendant, by becoming security to the note of the intestate, give him credit. The security would not have been required,had the credit of the intestate been sufficient. It was to give additional credit to the note, that'the defendant signed it. In giving credit to the note he gave credit to the intestate, and it is not improbable that he was induced to do so by the credk already given him by the intestate.

This then is a case of mutual credit, and it is unnecessary to enquire how much more than mutual credit is embraced in the words of our discount act. See the case' of Assignees of Vaughn, vs. Smith, 3 T. R. 507, n. The motion is granted.'

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 S.C.L. 423, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hinds-v-david-sc-1824.