Voris v. Shotts

Appellant began this action in the lower court against the appellees upon a promissory note. Appellee Shotts filed his separate answer in two paragraphs. There was a judgment by default against appellee Petro, who was the principal maker of the note. The defense made by the answer of appellee Shotts is that he is the surety on the note sued *221on; that appellant, the payee, and John E. Petro, the principal maker of the note, entered into an agreement for a valuable consideration, to extend the time for payment of the note for a definite period without the knowledge or consent of said appellee;…