Case ID: dc_4/html/0297-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "The Court", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

C. S. Fowler v. Stephen MacDonald.
    A written, promise, absolutely to pay the note of a third person, written at the foot of the note, is an original undertaking, and need not express the consideration.
    Assumpsit, on the following note of William Duncan:
    “ Washington, January 22d, 1831. Four days after date I promise to pay C. S. Fowler, fifty dollars, for value received.
    •“Wm. Duncan.”
    “ I will pay the above at maturity. Jan. 22d, 1831.
    “ S. MacDonald.”
    
      Mr. Hall, for the plaintiff,
    cited Story’s Chitty on Bills, 122.
    
      Mr. Fendall, for the defendant.
    This is an agreement to pay the debt of another, and although it is in writing, yet the consideration is not stated. Wayne v. Warlters, 5 East, 11; Fell on Guaranty, 318, 401; Lynn v. Lambe, and Eggarlon v. Mallhms ; Sanders v. Wakefield, 4 B. ¡fe A. 595; McComber v. Clarke, in this Court at December term, 1826, (3 Cranch, C. C. 6) ; Sloan v. Wilson, 4 Har. & Johns. 322.
    
      Mr. Hall, in reply, cited Fell on Guaranty, 45, (note) ; Pack
      
      ard v. Richardson, 17 Mass. 122, contra; Fell,46, (note) ; Leonard v. Vredenburgh, 8 Johns. 29 ; 2 Wheat. Selwyn, N. P. 63.
    The ease was submitted,by the counsel.
   The Court

(nem. con.) was of opinion that this was an original undertaking, and that the consideration need not be in writing.

Judgment for the plaintiff.