John M. Parker & Co. v. Guillot

Citations

• 118 La. 223
• 42 So. 782
• 1907 La. LEXIS 697

Syllabus

<p>1. Principal and Surety — Release of Surety-Extension op Time — Consideration.</p> <p>Defendants are not indorsers, but securities, upon the notes declared on. They claim to have been released from liability as such by reason of 'an alleged extension of time granted by the holder of the note to the maker, and his inability to subrogate them to the rights to which they were entitled, had they desired to take up the notes.</p> <p>The alleged extension of time, carrying with it their release from all liability, was a .mere indulgence to the maker of the note, at his request, as a favor, and without consideration, which he was at liberty legally to withdraw at any time.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 40, Principal and Surety, §§ 201, 203, 213.]</p> <p>2. Same.</p> <p>Not having estopped himself by this indulgence, plaintiff was in a position to turn the notes over to the defendants, on payment made by them, with full liberty of action on their part against the principal. Dubueli v. Goudchaux, 6 La. Ann. 7S0; Purdy v. Forstall, 13 South. 195, 45 La. Ann. 814; Metropolitan Bank v. Muller, 24 South. 295, 50 La. Ann. 1281, 16 Am. St. Rep. 475.</p> <p>3. Same — Remedies of Surety — Division of Liability.</p> <p>Defendants axe entitled to the benefit of the division which they claim. The insolvency of one of the sureties has not been established. Bank v. Muller, 24 South. 295, 50 La. Ann. 1280, 69 Am. St. Rep. 475.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>