W. Shanhouse Sons, Inc. v. Gudelsky
W. Shanhouse Sons, Inc. v. Gudelsky
Opinion of the Court
This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of the defendant in a suit on the following written guaranty signed by the defendant:
“Whereas, W. Shanhouse Sons, manufacturers, Rockford, Illinois, have sold merchandise to I. Gndelsky & Sons Company, located at Muskegon, Michigan, and are extending* credit favors to said company.
*511 “Therefore, in consideration of such credit favors, I, Israel Gudelsky, hereby guarantee and hold myself personally responsible to W. Shanhouse Sons for the account of I. Gudelsky & Sons Company in an amount not to exceed the sum of $1,000.
“This guarantee covers debts thus far contracted not to exceed the sum of $1,000 and in the event that the debts thus far contracted do not amount to $1,000 this guarantee applies to future bills of merchandise to be contracted by said company, the bills contracted and the future bills together not to exceed the sum of $1,000.”
Plaintiff claims the right to recover on the theory that the instrument sued upon is a special continuing guaranty covering subsequent indebtedness to the amount of $1,000. The language of the guaranty will not admit of such a construction.' It plainly states that it does not apply to future indebtedness unless the debts due at the time it was given do not amount to $1,000. It is conceded that the debts at that time amounted to $2,511.51, of which amount the defendant guaranteed to pay $1,000. The record shows that at' the time of suit the entire indebtedness existing when, the guaranty was given had been paid; and that the plaintiff is ■here seeking to recover a balance due on future credits. For this defendant is not liable.
The judgment is affirmed, with' costs to the defendant.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- W. Shanhouse Sons, Inc. v. Gudelsky.
- Status
- Published