Draper v. Romeyn
New York Supreme Court
This was an appeal by the defendant Romeyn- from a judgment rendered at a special term. The complaint was an ordinary one on a promissory note for $300, dated January 3,0,1850, charging the defendant Bade as maker, ahd the defendant Romeyn as indorser. The answer of the defendant Romeyn alleged that he was an accommodation indorser of the. note, to the knowledge of the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal by the defendant Romeyn- from a judgment rendered at a special term. The complaint was an ordinary one on a promissory note for $300, dated January 3,0,1850, charging the defendant Bade as maker, ahd the defendant Romeyn as indorser. The answer of the defendant Romeyn alleged that he was an accommodation indorser of the. note, to the knowledge of the plaintiff. That Bade was, before and after the date of the note, employed by the plaintiff to attempt to sell certain lands in Michigan. That Bade and one John W. Wattson were, before and at the time of the maturity of the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Clerke, J.
Did the plaintiff make siich an agreement with the principal to extend the time of payment, as to entitle the surety to a discharge from his liability1?
It is a rule,, too well settled to admit of dispute, now, that an extension of the time of payment for a single day, without the assent of the surety will exonerate him. But this extension of the credit must be founded on a consideration, and must be such an agreement as precludes the creditor from enforcing payment against the principal until the expiration of a specified period.
In this case, the evidence in relation…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Abel v. AlexanderIndiana Supreme Court · 1874
- Menifee v. ClarkIndiana Supreme Court · 1871
- Dorlon v. ChristieNew York Supreme Court · 1862
- McCormick Harvesting Machine Co. v. RaeNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1900
- Berry v. PullenSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1879
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.