Case Name: McCANLES et al. v. FREDERICKSON
Court: Philadelphia District Court
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1837-09-09
Citations: 2 Miles 132
Docket Number: 
Parties: McCANLES et al. v. FREDERICKSON.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases determined in the district court for the city and county of Philadelphia
Volume: 2
Pages: 132–132

Head Matter:
McCANLES et al. v. FREDERICKSON.
September 9, 1837.
Ride to show cause of action, and why defendoMt should not be discharged on common bail.
An affidavit that plaintiff had paid a certain sum of money, for the use of the defendant, without averring that it was at the instance or request of the defendant, is insufficient to hold to bail.
THIS was a capias ad respondendum, to June term, 1837, 318, The plaintiffs on being ruled to show their cause of action, produced the affidavit of one of them, which was as follows, viz,:
“ George T. Chambers, one of the above named plaintiffs, being duly sworn according to law, says : that the above mentioned defendant is justly and truly indebted to the said plaintiffs in the sum of 719 dollars, being the amount without interest, costs, &c. paid to the Manufacturers’ and Mechanics’ Bank, to his use by the said plaintiffs, in part satisfaction of a demand against him, held by that corporation.”
Troubat, for plaintiffs.
Miles, for defendant.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.—
This affidavit is defective. A voluntary payment of the debt of another, there being no obligation to pay, or if against the consent of the debtor, gives no right of action to the payer against the debtor. There must be an instance and request of the defendant, either express or implied. Here none is stated, and no facts are stated from which the same can be inferred. The defendant must be discharged on common bail.
Rule absolute.
See the eases in the Index in this volume as to affidavits to hold to bail.