Johnson v. Britton

23 Ind. 105
Indiana Supreme Court·Decided November 15, 1864·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinions

Perkins, J.

We think the averments in the complaint in this case bring it within Kirk et ux. v. The Fort Wayne, etc. Company, 13 Ind. Pep. 56; Merritt v. Wells, 18 Ind. 171. The plaintiff avers that she paid the money to the defendants to pay off a certain mortgage, which they specially agreed to pay off for her, and gave the mortgage in question to secure the performance of the agreement. They [106] have failed to perform and should refund, etc. The form of the contract is different from that of a simple indemnity.

Per Curiam.—The judgment is affirmed, with one. per cent, damages and costs.

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

Johnson v. Britton, 23 Ind. 105 (Ind. 1864).

23 Ind. 105 (Johnson v. Britton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bohlcke v. Buchanan
68 S.W. 92 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1902)
Lyle v. McCormick Harvesting Machine Co.
51 L.R.A. 906 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1900)
Lowe v. Turpie
44 N.E. 25 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1896)
Pummill v. Baumgartnr
3 Ohio N.P. 40 (Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County, 1895)
Collins v. State ex rel. Hutchinson
30 N.E. 12 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1892)
Citizens State Bank v. Adams
91 Ind. 280 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1883)
Bodkin v. Merit
86 Ind. 560 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1882)
South Side Planing Mill Ass'n v. Cutler & Savidge Lumber Co.
64 Ind. 560 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1878)
Shirts v. Irons
47 Ind. 445 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1874)
Mullendore v. Scott
45 Ind. 113 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1873)
Scobey v. Finton
39 Ind. 275 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1872)