Long v. . Meares
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBrogdeN, J.
Did the second bond for $225 supersede the original bond of $300, or are said bonds cumulative?
The defendant contends that, when the new bond for $225 was executed by a different surety, he was thereby relieved of liability on the original $300 replevin bond. The judgment requiring- the giving of the new bond of $225 made no reference to the original replevin bond of $300 which the defendant, O. Meares, signed as surety. The determinative principle of law is thus stated in the headnote of Nimocks v. Pope, 117 N. C., 315, 23 S. E., 269: “A surety on a replevin bond, given for the return of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Orange Trust Co. v. HayesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- V. Wallace & Sons v. RobinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
- Nimocks v. . PopeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1895
- McDonald v. . McBrydeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1895
3Cited by3 opinions
- Moore v. HumphreySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
- Speight Box & Panel Co. v. IpockSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Epps v. MillerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970