Taylor v. . Bridger
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
ClaRK, O. J.
The only question presented is whether the quia timet notice under C. S., 3967, would relieve the defendants of their obligation as endorsers of a note, the makers of which were nonresidents.
Independently of this statute, “Forbearance or delay in collecting from the principal debtor furnishes no ground on which the surety can ask for exoneration.” Bank v. Homesley, 99 N. C., 531.
When the creditor fails to bring suit against the principal upon due notice by the surety or endorsers, there is an implied agreement to forbear which discharges the surety. On the face of the note here…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- First National Bank v. HomesleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888
3Cited by3 opinions
- Rasberry v. . WestSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
- Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in Its Corporate Capacity, Plaintiff v. M.F. Crouch, Clifford E. Hemingway, and Mary HemingwayCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1987
- Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in Its Corporate Capacity, Plaintiff v. M.F. Crouch, Clifford E. Hemingway, and Mary HemingwayCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1987