Munday v. Bank of Franklin
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
Stacy, O. J.
It will be observed that the plaintiff was not only an endorser of the Ingram note, but also a guarantor. As such, the relation of debtor and creditor existed between him and the defendant, and under the decision in Trust Co. v. Trust Co., 188 N. C., 766, 125 S. E., 536, the charge or credit was properly entered in respect of the checking account, if not the certificate of deposit, which would repel the bar of the statute of limitations, the only point in dispute, and ultimately end in the same result as the judgment entered below. Hence, the trial will not be disturbed. It is not…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- State v. . BealSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- Rankin v. OatesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
- Brewer v. RingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
- Davis v. Industrial Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1894
- Rankin v. . OatesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Abdalla v. State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- James v. Atlantic & East Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- Biby v. Union National Bank of MinotNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1968
- Barrett v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941