Browning v. . Porter
This text of 20 S.E. 961 (Browning v. . Porter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
When the surety Yin son paid the note in full on the 9th of November, 1887, and failed to have it assigned to a trustee for his benefit, the debt was discharged. Peebles v. Gay, 115 N. C., 38; Lyles v. Rogers, 113 N. C., 197, and authorities there cited. The satisfaction of the ■debt extinguished the vendor’s lien, and the legal estate in the horse, at the time^in the possession of Solomon, vested in his mortgagee, who had then a first lien on it, and, on breach of the condition, the right to recover the possession of the horse, as he seeks to do in this action.
The judgment of the court below is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
20 S.E. 961, 116 N.C. 62, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/browning-v-porter-nc-1895.