Legal Opinion

Bank v. Walter

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided January 20, 1900PublishedCited by 11 opinions

FROM RUTHEREORD. Appeal from Chancery Court of Rutherford County. W. S. BeardeN, Oh.

1Opinion of the Court

Beaed, J".

Tbe suit is upou -two notes for $988.33 each, dated March 21, 1896, due at sixty-days, made by defendant and one Vaughn Hartman, now deceased, payable to the complainant bank.

The defendant was surety, and his defense is that the bank and the principal debtor entered into an agreement, upon valuable consideration, for an extension of time upon the notes, without his consent,' which operated to release him.

The Chancellor decreed in favor of the bank, and the defendant appealed. The Court of -Chancery Appeals affirmed the Chancellor’s decree, and the defendant has appealed to this…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. McKamy v. McNabbTennessee Supreme Court · 1896

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Deaton v. ViseTennessee Supreme Court · 1948
  2. In re the Estate of KrugerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1931
  3. Graham v. ShephardTennessee Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Hatley v. JohnstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  5. Kincaid v. AldersonTennessee Supreme Court · 1962

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API