History
  • No items yet
midpage
Low v. Smart
5 N.H. 353
Superior Court of New Hampshir...
1831
Check Treatment
By the court.

The law seems to be perfectly settled, that one surety is entitled to the benefit of any security which another,'who is his co-surety, has. 1 Johns. S. C. Rep. 409; 10 ditto, 524 ; 11 ditto, 22—23 ; 10 ditto, 409 ; 4 ditto, C. Rep. 123 ; 4 N. H. Rep. 488 ; 4 Vesey, 824 ; 1 Johns. Cases, 137 ; 17 Johns. 384 ; 7 ditto, 336 ; 8 Pick. 122 ; 5 ditto, 307 ; 17 Mass. Rep. 464 ; 2 Binney, 382.

This being the case, it is clear that Emery had an interest in the event of the suit inclining him in favor of the plaintiff, who called him. He was, therefore, improperly admitted to testify for the plaintiff, and there must be

A new trial granted.

Case Details

Case Name: Low v. Smart
Court Name: Superior Court of New Hampshire
Date Published: Jan 15, 1831
Citation: 5 N.H. 353
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.