Davis v. Emerson

Decided April 15, 1840

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · decided 1840-04-15

Assumpsit for money paid, laid out and expended. The plaintiff and defendant had been sureties for one Chadbourne, and a suit had been brought against them, and judgment obtained against the three. This execution had been paid by the plaintiff, Chadbourne being insolvent, and he now claimed to recover one half the amount of execution, debt and costs. The defendant objected to the allowance of any part of the costs.

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““The failure to pay, which occasioned the costs, was imputable to the defendant, as much as to the plaintiff.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Naylor

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1840-04-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 1959

2 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1The opinion of the Court was by

Weston C. J.

¶2A judgment was recovered against the plaintiff and the defendant, for which both were jointly and equally liable. The failure to pay, which occasioned the costs, was imputable to the defendant, as much as to the plaintiff. The plaintiff paid the execution, including the costs. As the defendant was liable for half the execution, to that extent, the plaintiff paid money for his use and benefit. The costs cannot be distinguished from the debt. Every equitable principle, which entitles the plaintiff to contribution for the one applies equally to the other.

¶3Judgment on the verdict.