Bank at Decatur v. Johnson
Supreme Court of Alabama
'Writ of Error to the County Court of Morgan. Motion by the Bank, under the statute, for a judgment against Johnson, as one of the makers of a note executed the 06th June, 1839, by one Burnett as principal, and by the defendant and others as sureties, payable one hundred and twenty days after date.
Read the full summary
'Writ of Error to the County Court of Morgan. Motion by the Bank, under the statute, for a judgment against Johnson, as one of the makers of a note executed the 06th June, 1839, by one Burnett as principal, and by the defendant and others as sureties, payable one hundred and twenty days after date. The defendant pleaded, that after the execution of this note, he being surety only on the same, the Bank accepted from Burnett, the principal, a deed, by which certain property was conveyed to a trustee, in trust, to secure the Bank for Burnett’s indebtedness, in one, two and three years. That this…
1Opinion of the CourtGoldthwaite, J.
The question arising from the pleadings in this case is, whether the giving of day of payment to the principal is such a discharge of the surety as to require a valuable consideration, moving from the creditor to him, to sustain a promise to pay, made upon a full knowledge of the circumstances from which the discharge is inferred. It is a well settled rule with respect to parties to bills and notes, who are discharged by the laches of the holder, that a subsequent promise to pay, made with a knowledge of the laches, will revive the original liability. [Chitty on Bills, 534, and cases there…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hepburn and Dundas's Heirs v. Dunlop & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1816
- Reynolds v. DouglassSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
3Cited by3 opinions
- Davis, Moody Co. v. Betz & CullmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
- Wellden v. WittSupreme Court of Alabama · 1905
- Porter v. HodenpuylMichigan Supreme Court · 1860