Tousey v. Bishop
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Lee District Court. Sureties: effect of giving time. — Plaintiffs were sureties in a replevin bond, in which one Ladue was the principal. This bond was executed for tbe benefit of Root,. Guiger & Bro. In tbe present proceeding, tbe plaintiffs, as such sureties, claim that they are released because of a valid agreement on the part of Boot, Giger & Bro., to extend the time of payment to Ladue without the knowledge of plaintiffs.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Lee District Court. Sureties: effect of giving time. — Plaintiffs were sureties in a replevin bond, in which one Ladue was the principal. This bond was executed for tbe benefit of Root,. Guiger & Bro. In tbe present proceeding, tbe plaintiffs, as such sureties, claim that they are released because of a valid agreement on the part of Boot, Giger & Bro., to extend the time of payment to Ladue without the knowledge of plaintiffs. The further necessary facts are briefly these: Boot, Giger & Bro., in 1865, commenced an attachment suit in the Lee District Court, against one Cappell, and…
1Opinion of the CourtDillon, J.
1. Judgment: agreement to restrain. Although the voluminous testimony in this case has been attentively examined by the court, it is not deemed necessary to review it in this opinion. ° r Pon some material questions it is conflicting and irreconcilable. It is proposed simply to state the results which the court has reached.
We may concede the fundamental proposition of law upon which the plaintiff’s ease is grounded, viz.: that, if there was, at and before the rendition of judgment, a valid and binding agreement by Boot, Giger & Bro., to stay the execution, and if this was made without the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Tudor v. GoodloeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1841
3Cited by1 opinion
- Dwinnell v. McKibbenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1895