Fertilizer Co. v. . Brock
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal from Bond, J., November Term, 1923, of PasquotaNK, from an order of the clerk refusing to sign judgment tendered by the plaintiff. On 1 May, 1922, the defendants signed the note sued on. The plaintiff brought suit against both of the makers.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Bond, J., November Term, 1923, of PasquotaNK, from an order of the clerk refusing to sign judgment tendered by the plaintiff. On 1 May, 1922, the defendants signed the note sued on. The plaintiff brought suit against both of the makers. The defendant Mann filed no answer, but the defendant Brock filed an answer, admitting his liability for one-half the note, less a credit of $419 which he personally had paid, alleging that it was agreed at the time of the execution of the note that he was to be bound for only one-half, and that the payee had expressly agreed to release him from…
1Opinion of the CourtClark, C. J.
The tender by defendant Brock of judgment, he contends, was conditioned upon its being taken by plaintiff in full satisfaction, so far as he was concerned, of the claim set out in the complaint.
The judgment of the court ignores such condition and gives judgment for the one-half (deducting payment of $419), and reserves for future trial and determination plaintiff’s claim for the balance of the amount sued on.
A tender of judgment of an amount less than the amount sued on, in full satisfaction, is like a tender of cash for a less amount than is claimed by the- plaintiff. A plaintiff cannot reap…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Stewart v. . BryanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
- Cline v. . RudisillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1900