Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

John A. Rowan And John L. Harris, Copartners In Trade Under The Name And Style Of Rowan And Harris, Plaintiffs In Error, v. Hiram G. Runnels, Defendant In Error

1847 • 46 U.S. 134 • Taney Court
John A. Rowan and John L. Harris, copartners in trade under the name and style of Rowan and Harris, were plaintiffs in error against Hiram G. Runnels who was defendant in error. The case involved a dispute over an unpaid debt for goods sold by the plaintiff to the defendant which had been secured by a promissory note signed by Runnels as well as two other individuals who had since died or become insolvent leaving no means of repayment to the plaintiffs from them directly. The Supreme Court held...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Taney Court
Term: 1847
46 U.S. 134
12 L. Ed. 85
1847 U.S. LEXIS 304
Argued: Dec 08, 1846

John A. Rowan And John L. Harris, Copartners In Trade Under The Name And Style Of Rowan And Harris, Plaintiffs In Error, v. Hiram G. Runnels, Defendant In Error

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

John A. Rowan and John L. Harris, copartners in trade under the name and style of Rowan and Harris, were plaintiffs in error against Hiram G. Runnels who was defendant in error. The case involved a dispute over an unpaid debt for goods sold by the plaintiff to the defendant which had been secured by a promissory note signed by Runnels as well as two other individuals who had since died or become insolvent leaving no means of repayment to the plaintiffs from them directly. The Supreme Court held that when multiple parties are jointly liable on a contract, their liability is joint and several so that if one party cannot pay due to death or insolvency then all remaining parties must be responsible for paying off any outstanding debts owed on it regardless of how much each individual owes individually; thus making Runnels solely responsible for repaying this debt even though he did not owe more than his share originally agreed upon with those now deceased or insolvent signatories on the original promissory note agreement between him and them at its inception.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Rowan and Harris v. Runnels, the dissenting opinion argued that a contract between two parties should be enforced even if it is not in writing. The majority opinion held that an oral agreement was unenforceable because it did not meet the requirements of a Statute of Frauds, which requires certain contracts to be in writing. However, Justice McLean disagreed with this ruling and argued that when there is evidence proving mutual assent between two parties on an oral agreement then it should still be enforceable despite its lack of written form. He believed that any other interpretation would lead to injustice as one party could easily deny their involvement or breach their obligations without consequence due to lack of proof from a written document. Therefore he concluded by stating his belief that verbal agreements are binding under law so long as they can be proven through sufficient evidence such as testimony from witnesses or circumstantial facts indicating both parties had agreed upon terms for said contract prior to performance being rendered by either side.

Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms