Skip to content


Guthrie Vs. White - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number1 U.S. 268
AppellantGuthrie
RespondentWhite
Excerpt:
..... guthrie v. white, 1 u.s. 268 (1788) 1 u.s. 268 (dall.) guthrie assignee v. white supreme court of pennsylvania april term, 1788 a certiorari was issued to john culbertson esq; one of the justices for the county of chester, to remove the proceedings in this cause; and the record being accordingly returned, it appeared that one irwin, having maintained the defendant's daughter for several weeks, made out an account against him, and, after swearing to the truth and justice of its contents, he assigned all his right, title, and interest therein to the plaintiff. the debt being under ten pounds, the plaintiff, in his own name, sued the father before the justice upon this assignment, and obtained a judgment and execution against him; although, as it was.....
Judgment:
GUTHRIE v. WHITE - 1 U.S. 268 (1788)
U.S. Supreme Court GUTHRIE v. WHITE, 1 U.S. 268 (1788)

1 U.S. 268 (Dall.)

Guthrie Assignee
v.
White

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

April Term, 1788

A certiorari was issued to John Culbertson Esq; one of the Justices for the county of Chester, to remove the proceedings in this cause; and the record being accordingly returned, it appeared that one Irwin, having maintained the Defendant's daughter for several weeks, made out an account against him, and, after swearing to the truth and justice of its contents, he assigned all his right, title, and interest therein to the Plaintiff. The debt being under ten pounds, the Plaintiff, in his own name, sued the father before the Justice upon this assignment, and obtained a judgment and execution against him; although, as it was stated in the Defendant's deposition, his daughter was of full age at the time of contracting the debt, and no assumption, upon his part, had been proved or suggested.

Bradford moved to reverse the Judgment; 1st, on account of the general irregularity of the proceedings; and 2ndly, because an action could not be maintained, by the assignee of a simple contract debt, in his own name.

The Court considered the whole proceedings to have been irregular; but said, that there could be no doubt of the sufficiency of the second reason alone, as a ground for setting them aside. And the Judgment was accordingly reversed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //