Case ID: denio_1/html/0655-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      By the Court, Beardsley, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Van Schoonhoven vs. A. & P. Comstock.
    The rule that an entire judgment against several when erroneous as to one must on error be reversed as to all, applies to judgments upon several liabilities under the statutes authorizing suits against different parties to commercial paper.
    
      So held where the judgment was against maker and endorser, and the alleged error was that the maker, when an infant, appeared in the suit in which the judgment was rendered by attorney.
    A mot 1 ox for the allowance of a writ of error coram nobis was made and opposed on the same grounds, as it respects the defendant A. Comstock, as mentioned in the last case. The judgment was recovered on a promissory note in which A. Comstock was maker and P. Comstock endorser.
    
      E. Clark, for the defendants.
    
      S. Stevens, for the plaintiff.
   By the Court, Beardsley, J.

Here is a joint judgment against two defendants, recovered pursuant to the statutes authorizing joint suits upon the several liabilities of different parties to commercial paper. (Laws 1832, p. 489 ; Laws 1835, p. 248; 2 R. S. 352.) But the judgment being joint and entire, if erroneous as to one is so in respect to both defendants. (Bac. Abr. Error, M. 1; Aleyn’s Rep. 74; 1 Ld Raym. 600; 14 John. 417—425.) Both of the defendants should therefore min in the writ. In other respects the same order is made which was granted in Higbie and others v. Comstock.

Motion granted. 
      
       See Harman v. Brotherson, (ante, p. 537.)