Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1895

Browning v. . Porter

Browning v. . Porter
Supreme Court of North Carolina · Decided February 5, 1895 · Avery
20 S.E. 961; 116 N.C. 62 (South Eastern Reporter)

Counsel

Mr. B. G. Daniel and IfeRae <& Day, for plaintiff., No counsel for the defendant (appellant).

Browning v. . Porter

Opinion of the Court

*64 Avery, J.:

When the surety Yin son paid the note in full on the 9th of November, 1887, and failed to have it assigned to a trustee for his benefit, the debt was discharged. Peebles v. Gay, 115 N. C., 38; Lyles v. Rogers, 113 N. C., 197, and authorities there cited. The satisfaction of the ■debt extinguished the vendor’s lien, and the legal estate in the horse, at the time^in the possession of Solomon, vested in his mortgagee, who had then a first lien on it, and, on breach of the condition, the right to recover the possession of the horse, as he seeks to do in this action.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.