Hardy & Mason v. Worthen
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Morgan Circuit Court. — Hon. E. L_ Edwards, Judge. “The law is just as imperative that the suit ■against the principal should be pressed to its final consummation, and that, too, with diligencé, as it is that it shall be commenced within the time limited. ’ Peters
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
— This was an action on a promissory note for $100, executed to plaintiffs by W. Worthen,. as principal, and Beanland and Barber, as sureties. Barber gave the plaintiffs, payees in the note, notice under the statute to commence suit against the principal and sureties thereon. The plaintiffs thereupon filed the note before a justice of the peace in the county where plaintiffs and the sureties resided. The principal then resided in the city of St. Louis. No service of summons was had upon the principal of the note. Judgment was had against the sureties.
The defendants contend that the plaintiffs…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Sisk v. RosenbergerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
3Cited by1 opinion
- Martinsburg Bank v. Bunch and Boil.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1923