Roberts v. Bane

Citations

• 32 Tex. 385

Syllabus

<p>-One joint maker of a note after its maturity made a deed of trust, by which it was provided that if the note should not be paid by a certain future day the trustee should sell the property conveyed and apply the proceeds to its payment. To a suit by the payee on the note and deed of trust, the other maker pleaded that he was only a surety for his comakCT,_who the deed of and that the deed of trust from the latter the plaintiff had extended the time of payment to this defendant’s principal, whereby this defendant was released. Neither the note nor deed disclosed the fact of suretyship, nor was there other proof that it was known to the plaintiff when he took the note or the deed of trust. Eeld, that even if the deed did extend the time of payment of the note, it furnished no defense to a party who held himself out as a principal, though he may have been but a surety as between himself and his co-maker.</p> <p>2—A deed of trust containing only such stipulations as are above indicated does not, it seems, import an extension of the time of payment of the note secured by it.</p> <p>8—Whether such a security did extend the time of payment was a question of construction to be decided by the court; and it was error to submit it as an issue to the jury.</p>