Jenkins v. . Wilkinson
Cases that cite this one
15 later published cases cite this decision.
- EAC Credit Corporation v. Wilson (N.C. 1972)
- State Ex Rel. Greene County v. National Bank (N.C. 1927)
- Macy v. Inland Empire Land Co. (Wash. 1927)
- Harvey v. Bank of Center Hill (Fla. 1922)
- Masters v. Boyes (Okla. 1914)
- Mudge v. . Varner (N.C. 1907)
- Fegley v. Jennings (Fla. 1902)
- Garren v. . Youngblood (N.C. 1934)
- Crane Co. v. . Longest Tessier Co. (N.C. 1919)
- Crane Co. v. Longest & Tessier Co. (N.C. 1919)
- Sykes v. Everett (N.C. 1914)
- Johnson v. . Lassiter (N.C. 1911)
- Cowan v. . Roberts (N.C. 1904)
- Cowan v. Roberts (N.C. 1904)
- Hutchins v. Planters National Bank of Richmond (N.C. 1902)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
There is a plain distinction between a guaranty of payment and a guaranty of collection. “ The former is an absolute promise to pay the debt at maturity, if not paid by the principal debtor, and the guarantee may begin an action against the guarantor. The latter is a promise to pay the debt upon the condition that the guarantee shall diligently prosecute the principal debtor without success.” Jones v. Ashford, 79 N. C , 173; Baylie’s Sureties and Guarantors, 113.
This case belongs to the former of these classes, and the plaintiff having complied with the terms imposed upon him by the contract, had a right to sue the defendant Nancy Wilkinson upon the maturity of the obligation.
Pier agreement was not to pay after the plaintiff had exhausted the mortgage security, but it was absolute upon default of the debtor, and the requirement that the plaintiff was not to surrender the mortgage was only for her protection by way of subrogation, in the event of her being compelled to pay the debt.
No error.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.