Higdon v. Bailey
Supreme Court of Georgia
Certiorari, in Gordon Superior Court. Decision by Judge Trippe, at April Term, 1858. Emily Higdon, administratrix of the estate of Robert Higdon, deceased, brought suit in a Justice’s Court, on six promissory notes, each for thirty dollars, against Hilary Higdon, and others. These notes were given .by Hilary for property bought at the sale of intestate’s estate, and the other defendants were his sureties.
Read the full summary
Certiorari, in Gordon Superior Court. Decision by Judge Trippe, at April Term, 1858. Emily Higdon, administratrix of the estate of Robert Higdon, deceased, brought suit in a Justice’s Court, on six promissory notes, each for thirty dollars, against Hilary Higdon, and others. These notes were given .by Hilary for property bought at the sale of intestate’s estate, and the other defendants were his sureties. Hilary was not served with summons, having left the State, and some of the sureties were not served. Those who were served appeared and plead: 1st. That they were only sureties on said…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
McDonald, J.
delivering the opinion.
[1.] There was no error in admitting evidence to prove that the defendants were only sureties for Hilary Higdon. The evidence does not vary the written contract, and it was certainly within the spirit of our statutes which authorize an issue to be made up and tried between joint-makers of notes as to the surety-ship of one for the other.
[2.] We do not think, however, with the presiding Judge in the Court below that the facts proven, as they appear in the return to the certiorari, discharged the sureties from their liability on the note. The…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Bank of Lumpkin County v. JustusSupreme Court of Georgia · 1920
- Whigham v. Hall & Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1911
- Smith v. FreylerMontana Supreme Court · 1882
- Hopkins v. KingCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1924