Sampson v. Barnard
98 Mass. 359
Opinion
The defendant’s own statement as to the circumstances under which the bond was executed and delivered shows that it was signed by him and accepted by the magistrate. The fact that the magistrate would not approve it as sufficient until strengthened by the addition of a third surety did not exonerate either of those who signed it originally.
No stamp is required upon such a bond under the laws of the United States. Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Sampson v. Barnard, 98 Mass. 359 (Mass. 1867).
98 Mass. 359 (Sampson v. Barnard) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Waverley Lumber Co. v. Piantedosi
160 N.E. 268 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1928)
Fry v. P. Bannon Sewer Pipe Co.
101 N.E. 10 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1913)
Paxton v. State
81 N.W. 383 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1899)
Ward v. Hackett
14 N.W. 578 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1883)
Daley v. Carney
117 Mass. 288 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1875)