Veazie v. Carr
Veazie v. Carr
Opinion of the Court
There is one ground of defence in this case which is decisive against the right of the plaintiff to recover, and we therefore express no opinion on either of the other points discussed at the argument.
The indorser of a note is discharged by a valid agreement, made without his consent, between the holder and the maker, to give .time to the maker. And such is the law, although the indorser has had legal notice of non-payment by the maker. Hubbly
The rule of law which we apply in this case extends not only to indorsers of notes and drawers and indorsers of bills of exchange, but also to all those who, on the face of a contract, sustain the relation of surety. Gifford v. Allen, 3 Met. 255. Theobald on Prin. & Surety, § 159 & seq. United States v. Hillegas, 3 Wash. C. C. 70.
Judgment for the defendant
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Joseph A. Veazie v. Martha C. Carr
- Status
- Published