Murdock v. Matthews
1 Brayt. 100
Opinion
The direction of the Judge to the Jury, is affirmed ; the plaintiff had a right to treat the receipt as a nullity, and proceed to prosecute her-claim against the estate of Samuel Murdock, as though no set-off had been made : the error having been detested, before the estate was settled, it was the duty of Hanford, as executor, to satisfy the plaintiff’s claim 5 and defendant, as surety, stands responsible, and is not discharged by the receipt.
Motion dismissed; and Judgment rendered on verdict.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Murdock v. Matthews, 1 Brayt. 100 (Vt. 1820).
1 Brayt. 100 (Murdock v. Matthews) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.