Contracts · MBE-tested
Joseph Walker v. Joseph Johnson
2 D.C. 2032 Cranch 203·United States Circuit Court of the District of Columbia·1820
(Thruston, J., contra,)
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Joseph Walker v. Joseph Johnson.
A note given for the assignment of the time of an apprentice, being for an illegal consideration, is void.
Assumpsit, on a promissory note, given in consideration of the assignment of the time of an apprentice.
Mr. Key, for the defendant,
contended that the assignment, being unlawful, was not a sufficient consideration to support the action upon the note.'
Mr. Jones, contra,
contended, that although the assignment was void, yet the defendant had enjoyed the services of the apprentice, and was bound in conscience to pay the note.
[MAJORITY — The Court]
The Court
(Thruston, J., contra,)
was of opinion, that the assignment being void, there was no consideration for the note.
(See the Maryland Act of 1793, c. 45, § 11, which authorizes an assignment of the time of an apprentice, for the benefit of the widow, upon the death of the master.)