Durham v. Greenwold
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Jenkins, Justice.
The Code, § 103-101, provides as follows: “The contract of suretyship is one whereby a person obligates himself to pay the debt of another in consideration of credit or indulgence, or other benefit given to his principal, the principal remaining bound therefor. It differs from a guaranty in this, that the consideration of the latter is a benefit flowing to the guarantor.” Although the distinction between a surety and a guarantor is thus plainly set forth by the Code, it would seem that the line of de*167marcation as there drawn is not absolutely all-inclusive, since an original…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Manry v. Waxelbaum Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1899
- Baggs v. FunderburkeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1912
- Heard v. Tappan & MerrittSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Sims & Auchmuty v. Clark & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1893
- Holmes v. Schwab & SonsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1913
3Cited by13 opinions
- Wolkin v. National Acceptance Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1966
- General Finance Corp. v. WelbornCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1958
- Simpson v. ChartersSupreme Court of Georgia · 1939
- Green Wold Grift Company v. DurhamSupreme Court of Georgia · 1941
- Parker v. PuckettCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1973
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.