M'Lean v. Whiting
This text of 8 Johns. 339 (M'Lean v. Whiting) 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.
Opinion
. The defendant, Whiting, is charged in execution, for two of the instalments, but not for any costs, and Powers was charged in execution only for the costs of the suit against him. His discharge from these costs does not, and ought not, to affect the execution against Whiting; for the demands were distinct, and Whiting was never answerable for those costs. The rule that a release of one co-obligor from his debt, or a discharge of one co-obligor from execution, should enure-as a release or discharge of all, is founded upon the just principle, that the party should not receive more than one satisfaction for the same debt, but that principle is -inapplicable to this case. The discharge of Powers from his costs was no satisfaction of the debt for which Whiting was imprisoned; the motion is therefore denied-.
Motion denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
8 Johns. 339, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mlean-v-whiting-nysupct-1811.