History
  • No items yet
midpage
Reed v. Bachelder
34 Me. 205
Me.
1852
Check Treatment

The opinion of the Court, Tenney, Howard, Rice and Appleton, J. J., was delivered by

Tenney, J.,

orally. — The defendants paid their proportion. By means of discharging the liens, and of moneys paid to Todd, the plaintiff has expended much more than his half. But he did not pay it for the defendants. The plaintiff and the defendants were not sureties for each other, nor .even co-contractors. The liens resulted from Todd’s delinquency. The moneys paid by the plaintiff upon the liens, are to be viewed as if placed by him in Todd’s hands to discharge those liens. They were advanced, not to the defendants, but to Todd.

But if they could be considered as advanced, for the defendants, there would be no right in the plaintiff to recover. For the defendants were not bound to discharge the liens, and no person could impose such an obligation upon them. They had a right to abandon the ship in preference to paying the liens. That right the plaintiff could not take from them.

Nonsuit confirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Reed v. Bachelder
Court Name: Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Date Published: Jul 1, 1852
Citation: 34 Me. 205
Court Abbreviation: Me.
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.