Moore v. Stadden

Ohio Supreme Court

Moore v. Stadden

1 Wright 88, 1 Ohio Ch. 88

DecidedSeptember 15, 1832

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Wright 88 (Moore v. Stadden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Moore v. Stadden, 1 Wright 88, 1 Ohio Ch. 88 (Ohio 1832).

Pincite

Opinion

LANE, J.

to the jury. The defence in this case is, that Stadden performed work and labor for Smith, while he held the note, which, by agreement, was to be applied to the payment of it. If you find the fact to be, that the work was done, under such agreement, it is .a payment, unless the parties afterwards agreed to apply the .amount to some other account. In the latter case,' the debt remains, notwithstanding the first agreement to apply the labor to pay the note.

Verdict for the defendant. Motion for a new trial overruled, .and judgment.

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

LANE, J.

to the jury. The defence in this case is, that Stadden performed work and labor for Smith, while he held the note, which, by agreement, was to be applied to the payment of it. If you find the fact to be, that the work was done, under such agreement, it is .a payment, unless the parties afterwards agreed to apply the .amount to some other account. In the latter case,' the debt remains, notwithstanding the first agreement to apply the labor to pay the note.

Verdict for the defendant. Motion for a new trial overruled, .and judgment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Wright 88, 1 Ohio Ch. 88, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moore-v-stadden-ohio-1832.