Legal Opinion

Goodman v. Griffin

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided July 15, 1830PublishedCited by 2 opinions

This was an action of assumpsit brought by R. Griffin againstT. Goodman in Tuscaloosa County Court, to recover on a note made by Goodman and one L. Myrick for $202 39, payable in June 1825, to R. Cheatham, guardian &c. or bearer; and of which the plaintiff was the bearer.

Read the full summary

This was an action of assumpsit brought by R. Griffin againstT. Goodman in Tuscaloosa County Court, to recover on a note made by Goodman and one L. Myrick for $202 39, payable in June 1825, to R. Cheatham, guardian &c. or bearer; and of which the plaintiff was the bearer. The defendant pleaded, 1st. the general issue, and 2nd. that after the npte became due, Cheatham, the then bearer, for a valuable consideration, released the defendant Goodman from any liability to pay the note. At the trial, at June term 1829, the defendant adduced evidence to prove that Myrick was the principal, and he,…

1Opinion of the Court

By JUDGE COLLIER.

The assignment of error brings to our view, the correctness of the instructions given the Court below, in Bruce v. Edwards a it was ruled, that the statute which requires the surety, in order to his discharge, to make a request in writing of the holder of a note or bond, to sue the principal, was cumulative; and that the surety might discharge himself by a verbal request to sue, if after a'failure ofthe holder to com-, ply, the principal became insolvent. It is apparent, according to the law as stated in that case, that the Judge erred in his instructions to the jury. He did…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Bruce v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1827

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Inge v. MurphySupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
  2. Howle v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API