Case Name: Robert E. Pecker & Co. v. Cannon and Scott's Administrators
Court: Iowa Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Iowa
Decision Date: 1860-10-06
Citations: 11 Iowa 20
Docket Number: 
Parties: Robert E. Pecker & Co. v. Cannon and Scott’s Administrators.
Judges: 
Reporter: Iowa Reports
Volume: 11
Pages: 20–21

Head Matter:
Robert E. Pecker & Co. v. Cannon and Scott’s Administrators.
1. Joindek of Parties: admikistkatoks. Where one of the makers of a joint and several promissory note dies pending an action thereon,, his administrators can not be substituted and joined with the surviving maker as a party defendant; citing and following Childs, SanfordCo. v. John Hyde S¡ Co. 10 Iowa 294; Wapello County v. Bigkam Adm’r, lb. 39.
Appeal from Pollc District Court.
Saturday, October 6.
Plaintiee sues upon a joint and several promissory note made by Cannon and Scott. Pending the action, Scott departed this life. His administrators were notified of the pendency of the action, and such proceedings were had as that, against their objection, judgment was rendered against Cannon, and G-oodrell and Scott “Administrators of the Estate of W. A. Scott deceased.” It was also ordered that an execution issue against Cannon, and that a transcript of this judgment-be filed at the office of the County Judge as an adjusted claim against the estate of W. A. Scott deceased.
From this proceeding the administrators appeal.
M. D. W. 3. McHenry for the appellants, relied upon Childs, Sanford § Co. v. John Hyde $■ Co. 10 Iowa 294.
Wilson T. Smith for the appellee.

Opinion:
Wright J.
It was erroneous to substitute the administrators and continue the action as to them. The action then pending remained against Cannon but it was improper' to unite with him defendants liable in a different capacity and against whom a different judgment, if any, would have to be rendered. The fact that the note was joint and several does not take the case out of the rule recognized in the case of Childs, Sanford & Co. v. John Hyde & Co., 10 Iowa 294. And see Wapello County v. Bigham, Administrator Ib. 39; Fink & Co. v. Taylor's Administratrix, 4 G. Greene 196.
Judgment reversed.