Maryland Reports; Cases Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Maryland Volume 49

Maryland Reports; Cases Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Maryland Volume 49

List price: US$9.02

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks


This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1880 edition. Excerpt: ...and this defence should have been specially pleaded. The issues here made by pleading are non estfaclum, and performance. While vs. Woodward, 5 Man. G. (f' S'., (57 Eng. C'. Law, 814.) 3. The third prayer was properly refused. (1.) It was confusing. What proof was there that plaintiffs had failed to exercise due caution and inquiry; and due caution as to what? No untruth had been told them. They cautiously inquired as to the existente of the bond, and received a truthful reply. What else was there about which they should have inquired? (2.) And how could the jury find that $500 was still due upon the bond to Strauss in the face of the proof; and what else was due by the other parties to the bond was irrelevant; it was a several obligation. 4. The fourth prayer was faulty in that it assumed that $55,000 was sold on the credit of 530,000. In fact, there was no proof that Strauss would not have sold all that he did without any security; and no matter how much the company or others owed Strauss, that is " res inter alios. " The question here is, how much did Snyder owe Boyd, and not how much others owed Strauss. 5. The fifth prayer asks the Court to say that Snyder's payment of $2000 discharged his liability for $2500. The simple inquiry is, was Snyder ever liable upon this guaranty at all? If so, then he was liable for $2500 at the least. Was he liable to Boyd and Ricketts upon it for anything at any time; if so, has this liability been discharged; and if so, how? Certainly a compromise between Strauss and Snyder cannot affect Boyd and Ricketts. Albert Ritchie and Samuel Snowden, for the defendant, appellant. l. The question proposed by plaintiff to the witness Boyd, as to the usage of the Brewing Company, was...
show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 216 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 12mm | 395g
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236966341
  • 9781236966346