Burdette v. Bartlett - 95 U.S. 637 (1877)


U.S. Supreme Court

Burdette v. Bartlett, 95 U.S. 637 (1877)

Burdette v. Bartlett

95 U.S. 637

Syllabus

Under sec. 827 of the Revised Statutes of the United States relating to the District of Columbia, persons severally liable upon the same obligation or instrument, including the parties to promissory notes, may all or any of them, at the option of the plaintiff, be included in the same action.

This was an action brought by Bartlett, Robbins, & Co. against Howard, Peugh, Lacey, and Ross, as makers, and Helmick and Burdette, as endorsers, of a certain joint and several promissory note for $1,993, dated July 16, 1873, and payable to the order of said Helmick. The note was duly protested for nonpayment, and the endorsers served with notice. The defendants, with the exception of Ross and Helmick, were served

Page 95 U. S. 638

with process; but the action was subsequently dismissed as to all of them but Burdette. Judgment by default was rendered against him, which the general term, upon appeal, affirmed. Burdette then sued out this writ, and here assigns for error:

1. The court below erred in giving judgment for plaintiffs, because there was misjoinder of parties defendants.

2. Because the makers and endorsers of a promissory note cannot be joined as defendants in the same action.

Page 95 U. S. 639



Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.