Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

SAMUEL S. DAVIS, Respondent, v. HECTOR TOULMIN, Appellant.

CHURCH, Ch. J.

The action was for contribution between co-sureties. The exception raises the question whether in such an action, it is competent for the defendant to avail himself of an indebtedness of the plaintiff to the principal, as a defense.

The authorities are decisive against it. ( O'Blemis v. Karing, 57 N.Y., 649; Lasher v. Williams, 55 id., 619; Springer v. Dwyer, 50 id., 19.) If the co-surety suing for contribution has received any money or property as payment, or security from the principal, he will be obliged to account for the same, but a simple indebtedness to the principle cannot be availed of by the defendant. In case of insolvency there may be cases where equity having all the parties before it might relieve, but no such question is presented in this case.

We concur with the opinion at Special Term.

The judgment must be affirmed.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

DAVIS v. TOULMIN
(May 20, 1879)