¶1The only question of law in this case is, whether, in a suit against one, proof may be given of a debt due to the plaintiff from him and another jointly. Of this there is no doubt. A debt due from two is due from each in solido, and each is liable for it, and each is presumed in law to know it. If the other joint debtor is-living, not dischargee! in insolvency or otherwise, and within reach of process, th& defendant should have pleaded the non-joinder in abatement If the defendant was actually surprised by the proof of a join! debt, he should have asked for time. Exceptions overruled.
63 Mass. 504
Scott v. Shears
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided September 15, 1852
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1852-09-15
This was an action of assumpsit, brought by the plaintiff in the court of common pleas, to recover of the defendant the value of work and labor done and performed by the plaintiff for the defendant, as stated in the plaintiff’s bill of particulars. The case was referred to an auditor. At the hearing before the auditor, the plaintiff offered his book with his oath, to support his bill of particulars.
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 1908
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1852-09-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →