Case Name: HENRY COOK v. JOSHUA HADLY
Court: Supreme Court of Errors and Appeals of Tennessee
Jurisdiction: Tennessee
Decision Date: 1813
Citations: 1 Cooke 465
Docket Number: 
Parties: HENRY COOK v. JOSHUA HADLY.
Judges: 
Reporter: Tennessee Reports
Volume: 3
Pages: 352–353

Head Matter:
Supreme Court of Errors and Appeals. Nashville.
1813.
HENRY COOK v. JOSHUA HADLY.
j >• Chancery.
A single contract cannot be split so as to authorize several suits in equity.
Thus, a person who claims, by assignment, the interest of one of several obligees in a bond to convey land, cannot sustain a bill against the obligor for his share.
But, upon application, complainant was permitted to amend, upon payment of costs, by making all the obligees defendants, with an allegation that they would not join as complainants.
The defendant executed his bond to several persons for the conveyance of a tract of land. One of the obligees assigned his interest of one hundred and sixty-eight acres to the complainant, who thereupon commenced a suit in equity against Hadly to compel him to convey that quantity.
To this bill the defendant filed a general demurrer.

Opinion:
By the Court.
It is obvious to us that a single contract cannot, in the form this case presents itself, give rise to more than one suit in equity. It was not in the power of the obligees before a deed was made, on any event to split their interests in such a manner as to authorize several suits against the defendant.
Note. The complainant moved to amend his bill, so as to make all the obligees defendants, alleging that they would not join with him as complainants. This was permitted upon the payment of costs.
Haywood, for the complainant.
Whiteside, for the defendant.