Bulluck Auto Sales Co. v. Meyer

172 S.E. 877, 206 N.C. 198, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 138

• Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decided: February 28, 1934
• Status: Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Affirmed on authority of Barco v. Forbes, 194 N. C., 204, 139 S. E., 227, and Bank v. Howard, 188 N. C., 543, 125 S. E., 126.

In the latter case, the following- was quoted from 8 C. J., 444, with approval: “One who gives a note in renewal of another note, with knowledge at the time of a partial failure of consideration for the original note, or of false representations by the payee, waives such defense and cannot set it up to defeat or reduce the recovery on the renewal note.”

No error having been made to appear of which defendant can complain, the judgment will not be disturbed.

Affirmed.