Keeler v. Templeton

This action was tried by this court and a judgment dismissing the complaint granted. (164 Misc. 113.) The facts are there stated.

At the trial the parties stipulated that under the California law applicable a “ valid extension of the date of payment of the note [in question] without the consent of the [defendants] would release them from all liability thereon or for the obligation represented thereby.” We held that there was a valid extension of the date of payment. Concededly, the defendants did not consent. Not*393withstanding the stipulation the plaintiffs relied on Mortgage Guarantee Co. v.…