Swift v. Hathaway

23 F. Cas. 562, 1 Gall. 417
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts·Decided May 15, 1813·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

STORY, Circuit Justice,

in summing up, stated to the jury, that if they were satisfied, that the notes were originally lodged in the hands of J. & G. Russell with the assent of the administrator; or if afterwards he assented to the collection of the money by them, or voluntarily left the money in their hands and ratified- their proceedings, the firm of Russell & Hathaway were discharged from all responsibility. If a creditor know that his debtor has lodged money in the hands of a third person for his account, and he assents to the proceeding, or gives a new credit to such person on the footing of such deposit, the original debtor is completely discharged.

The jury found a verdict, without difficulty, for the defendant Hathaway. Russell, the co-defendant, did not appear, and was defaulted. The court ordered a general judgment to be entered, that the plaintiff should take nothing by his writ.

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

Swift v. Hathaway, 23 F. Cas. 562, 1 Gall. 417 (circtdma 1813).

23 F. Cas. 562 (Swift v. Hathaway) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wright v. First Crockery Ware Co.
1 N.H. 281 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1818)