Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Alexander Petrie, Respondent, v. William Barckley et al., Appellants, 1872 — 47 N.Y. 653 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Alexander Petrie, Respondent, v. William Barckley et al., Appellants
47 N.Y. 653·New York Court of Appeals·1872·NY
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
Alexander Petrie, Respondent, v. William Barckley et al., Appellants.
(Argued December 15th, 1872;
decided December, 19th, 1872.)
Action upon a bond executed by defendants. Cooke, one of the defendants, offered to show that he received no consideration for signing the bond, but signed the same as surety for defendant.BarcMey; evidence excluded. Held, no error; that this evidence alone constituted no defence, that the seal affixed to the bond was presumptive evidence of full consideration received by the principal, and that was sufficient to bind surety.
J. O. Strong for appellants.
John Gcmson for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Grover, J.,]
Grover, J.,
reads opinion for affirmance.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.