 Whenever the main purpose and object of the promisor is not to answer for another, but to subserve some pecuniary or business purpose of his own, involving either a benefit to himself or damage to the other contracting party, his promise is not within...  The Law of Contracts - Sivu 24tekijä(t) Theophilus Parsons - 1866Koko teos - Tietoja tästä kirjasta
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - 1901 - 864 sivua
...of another, but to pay the party's own debt to some person other than his own creditor. "'It maybe stated as a general rule that wherever the main purpose...effect of extinguishing the liability of another. ' 3 Pars. Cont. (5th Ed.) 24. "The statute of frauds was intended to protect from the enforcement of... | |
 | Theophilus Parsons - 1857 - 524 sivua
...all the cases, though tt may most of them. We should prefer to state the distinction thus. Whenever the main purpose and object of the promisor is not...effect of extinguishing the liability of another. If there be an oral promise to pay the debt of another, and also to do some other thing, this last... | |
 | 1863 - 498 sivua
...all the cases, though it may most of them. We should prefer to state the distinction thus. Whenever the main purpose and object of the promisor is not...effect of extinguishing the liability of another. If there be an oral promise to pay the debt of another, and also to do some other thing, this last... | |
 | Causten Browne - 1863 - 616 sivua
...to the other contracting party, his promise is not within the statute, although it may be inform a promise to pay the debt of another, and although the performance of it may incidentally-have the effect of extinguishing that liability." Emerson v. Slater, 22 Howard, (US) 28.... | |
 | 1892 - 554 sivua
...purpose of his own, involving either a benefit to himself or damage to the other contracting party, his promise is not within the statute, although it...of another, and although the performance of it may accidentally have the effect of extinguishing that liability.' It is possible that the language qnoted... | |
 | Montgomery Hunt Throop - 1870 - 852 sivua
...himself, or damage to the other contracting party, his promise is not within the statute, although it.may be in form a promise to pay the debt of another, and...may incidentally have the effect of extinguishing that liability." Applying this principle, the learned judge said that this agreement was an original... | |
 | Causten Browne - 1870 - 616 sivua
...to the other contracting party, his promise is not within the statute, although it may be infopm a promise to pay the debt of another, and although the...may incidentally have the effect of extinguishing that liability." Emerson p. Slater, 22 Howard (US), 28. (As to this rule for determining whether the... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court, Samuel Freeman Miller - 1875 - 756 sivua
...purpose of his own, involving either a benefit to himself, or damage to the other contracting party, his promise is not within the statute, although it...may incidentally have the effect of extinguishing that liability. Nelson v. Boynton, 3 Met. 400; Leonard v. Vredenburg, 8 Johns. R. 39; Farley v. Cleveland,... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court, Samuel Freeman Miller - 1875 - 764 sivua
...damage to the other contracting party, his promise is not within the statute, although it may be-in form a promise to pay the debt of another, and although...may incidentally have the effect of extinguishing that liability. Nelson v. Boynton, 3 Met. 400; Leonard v. Vredenburg, 8 Johns. R. 39 ; Farley v. Cleveland,... | |
| |
