Darnall v. Morehouse

1 Citing case

  1. De Witt v. Monjo

    46 App. Div. 533 (N.Y. App. Div. 1900)   Cited 7 times

    All the authorities in this State hold that in the case of a precedent debt the note of a third person is not to be deemed to be taken in payment unless there is positive proof to that effect. (See Whitaker v. Whitaker, 4 Hun, 810; Raynor v. Laux, 28 id. 35; Smith v. Applegate, 1 Daly, 91; Darnall v. Morehouse, 36 How. 511.) In the last-mentioned case, as well stated in the head note: "The extinguishment of one cause of action by the substitution of another of the same degree can only be by way of accord and satisfaction which cannot be implied by law, but is the effect of agreement between the parties.