Adams v. . Hayes
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Civil aotioN, beard on complaint and demurrer, before Bryan, J., at Spring Term, 1896,.of Wautauga Superior Court. The complaint was as fellows: “The plaintiff in the above entitled action, complaining of the defendants, alleges: “1. That on the 30th day of .May, 1888, F. M. Hodges and R. A. Adams, doing business under the style and firm of Hodges & Adams, executed their promissory note to L._ A. G-reen for the sum of $600, with J. L. Hodges, Wm.
Read the full summary
Civil aotioN, beard on complaint and demurrer, before Bryan, J., at Spring Term, 1896,.of Wautauga Superior Court. The complaint was as fellows: “The plaintiff in the above entitled action, complaining of the defendants, alleges: “1. That on the 30th day of .May, 1888, F. M. Hodges and R. A. Adams, doing business under the style and firm of Hodges & Adams, executed their promissory note to L._ A. G-reen for the sum of $600, with J. L. Hodges, Wm. T. Hayes, E. H. Dougherty, E. F. Lovill and this plaintiff as sureties on said abové note. “2. The principals in above mentioned note having failed…
1ConcurrenceOlabK, J.
By alleging in his complaint that he made a demand on each of the defendants for “his con-tributive share” by having joined all his co-sureties as defendants, it seems plain that the plaintiff brought his action to recover of each defendant the fro rata which he should equitably contribute and this would depend upon the num.ber shown to be solvent. The complaint and the prayer for *388relief are not carefully drawn, but tne remedy to which a plaintiff is entitled depends,- not upon his prayer for relief, but upon the facts alleged and. proved. See cases cited in Clark’s Code, 2nd Ed. pp. 150,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Johnson v. . LoftinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892