TARIN v. MORRIS, 2 U.S. 115 (1790)
U.S. Supreme Court
TARIN v. MORRIS, 2 U.S. 115 (1790)2 U.S. 115 (Dall.)
Tarin
v.
Morris, et. al.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
September Term, 1790
The Plaintiff was indorsee of a Note, which was drawn by Gheir, in favor of the Defendant, William Morris. Soon after the present action was brought, the Defendant became bankrupt; and another suit was instituted on the same note against Gheir, the drawer, in which judgment had been obtained for the debt and costs. The Defendant's certificate being still in suspense, Ingerfoll moved that judgment should likewise be entered in the present action for costs; stating that several suits may be brought against all the parties to a Bill or Note; and that although only one satisfaction could be recovered, yet execution for costs might be issued in all the suits. Bail: B. of E. 43. 2 Vez. 115. But Sergeant, for the Defendant, urged, that this was a hard case, as his client was originally only an indorser, and had become a bankrupt; that it was at the peril of the holder of a bill, or note, so far as respects the costs, if he sued, for one satisfaction, all the parties that were liable to make it; and that, in the case cited, judgment had previously been obtained in all the suits; while, in this case, judgment has not been obtained, and is only requested for costs.
By the Court: We entertain no doubt upon this subject: It is the case of several persons, severally bound, and severally sued, where, until one has actually made the satisfaction, all are liable to make it. The cases cited clearly express the principle.
Let judgment be entered for costs.
U.S. Supreme Court
TARIN v. MORRIS, 2 U.S. 115 (1790) 2 U.S. 115 (Dall.) Tarinv.
Morris, et. al. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania September Term, 1790 The Plaintiff was indorsee of a Note, which was drawn by Gheir, in favor of the Defendant, William Morris. Soon after the present action was brought, the Defendant became bankrupt; and another suit was instituted on the same note against Gheir, the drawer, in which judgment had been obtained for the debt and costs. The Defendant's certificate being still in suspense, Ingerfoll moved that judgment should likewise be entered in the present action for costs; stating that several suits may be brought against all the parties to a Bill or Note; and that although only one satisfaction could be recovered, yet execution for costs might be issued in all the suits. Bail: B. of E. 43. 2 Vez. 115. But Sergeant, for the Defendant, urged, that this was a hard case, as his client was originally only an indorser, and had become a bankrupt; that it was at the peril of the holder of a bill, or note, so far as respects the costs, if he sued, for one satisfaction, all the parties that were liable to make it; and that, in the case cited, judgment had previously been obtained in all the suits; while, in this case, judgment has not been obtained, and is only requested for costs. By the Court: We entertain no doubt upon this subject: It is the case of several persons, severally bound, and severally sued, where, until one has actually made the satisfaction, all are liable to make it. The cases cited clearly express the principle. Let judgment be entered for costs.
