Bridges v. Phillips
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from San Augustine. Tried below before the Hon. Archibald W. 0. Hicks. Suit by appellant against appellee on the joint and several note of appellee, and S. W. Blount and E. Price, who signed as sureties of the appellee.
Read the full summary
Appeal from San Augustine. Tried below before the Hon. Archibald W. 0. Hicks. Suit by appellant against appellee on the joint and several note of appellee, and S. W. Blount and E. Price, who signed as sureties of the appellee. Among other defences the defendant pleaded that he was discharged from the payment of said note, by the following release : I have this day received of B. E. Price, Ex’or of |E. Price, and S. W. Blount, two hundred dollars in cash to release them from any liability as securities on a note for twelve hundred dollars, dated 26th Nov., 1852, (the note sued on.) Said note…
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
The principal and only question presented by the record, which is deemed to require notice, arises upon the charge of the Court, to the effect that the release of the defendant’s co-promissors, Blount and Price, operated a release of the defendant.
It is said to be a well settled rule, that a release to one of several obligors, whether they are bound jointly, or jointly and severally, discharges the others, and may be pleaded in bar. (Rowley v. Stoddard, 7 Johns. R. 207, 210 ; Story on Con. Sec. 996, 997.) But this is said only of a technical release under seal. A release by parol to one…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- De Zeng v. BaileyNew York Supreme Court · 1832
3Cited by11 opinions
- City of Coleman v. KenleyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1943
- Metze v. EntmanCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1979
- Gourley v. TylerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1891
- McIlhenny Co. v. BlumTexas Supreme Court · 1887
- Wills Point Bank v. Bates, Reed & CooleyTexas Supreme Court · 1890
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.