Pratt v. Hedden
Cases that cite this one
7 later published cases cite this decision.
- McCrary v. Berry (Ga. Ct. App. 1935)
- Walker v. Traylor Engineering & Mfg. Co. (8th Cir. 1926)
- Bank of Carrollton, Miss. v. Latting (Okla. 1913)
- Robertson v. Rowell (Mass. 1893)
- Lomerson v. Johnston (New Jersey Court of Chancery 1888)
- Evans v. Beaver (Ohio Circuit Courts 1888)
- Howe v. Taggart (Mass. 1882)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The defendant’s contract, (whether it is to be considered in the nature of an indorsement, of a guaranty or of suretyship,) having been made after the note had once been delivered, requires proof of a distinct consideration to support it. The agreement between Pond and the bank, which is the only consideration relied on, not being proved to have been made known to the defendant, is no sufficient consideration for his promise. Ellis v. Clark, 110 Mass. 389. The defendant therefore was not liable on the note, and cannot be required to contribute to its payment. Judgment for the defendant
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.