Campbell v. Baker

46 Pa. 243, 1864 Pa. LEXIS 10
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedJanuary 4, 1864
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 46 Pa. 243 (Campbell v. Baker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Campbell v. Baker, 46 Pa. 243, 1864 Pa. LEXIS 10 (Pa. 1864).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered, January 4th 1864, by

Lowbje, C. J.

The court below was in error in treating this as a general guaranty. When a guaranty is general, that is, without having any of its terms fixed in the writing, the law adds the usual conditions that there shall be due and unsuccessful diligence used by the creditor to collect the claim from the principal, unless it appear that all diligence would be hopeless. But the law adds or implies no such condition when the parties have themselves fixed the terms of the contract.

They have done so in this instance. The guaranty is special of the payment of the note, “when due,” and it was broken by the non-payment at maturity, and so the law seems to have been [246]*246usually understood: Brightly’s Rep. 96; 1 Miles 276; 1 Philad. Rep. 70.

Yet such a guarantor is a species of surety, and is discharged from his liability, if the creditor did, by a subsequent valid contract, give time to the principal. We cannot specially discuss this point, because there is no evidence on our paper-book by which we can judge o.f its relevancy and true character.

Judgment reversed, and a new trial awarded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

First National Consumer Discount Co. v. McCrossan
486 A.2d 396 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1984)
FIRST NAT. CONS. DISCOUNT CO. v. McCrossan
486 A.2d 396 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1984)
Lincoln Bank v. Gem City Wholesale Grocery Co.
133 A. 554 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1926)
Miners State Bank v. Auksztokalnis
128 A. 726 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1925)
Motors Mortgage Corp. v. Garletts
5 Pa. D. & C. 163 (Fayette County Court, 1924)
Homewood Peoples Bank v. Hastings
106 A. 308 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1919)
Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co. v. Wilson
63 Pa. Super. 294 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1916)
Hartley Silk Manufacturing Co. v. Berg
48 Pa. Super. 419 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1911)
Pattison v. Cobb
61 A. 1108 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1905)
American Radiator Co. v. Hoffman
26 Pa. Super. 177 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1904)
Delsman v. Friedlander
66 P. 297 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1901)
Ritchie v. Walter
31 A. 334 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1895)
Shaffstall v. McDaniel
25 A. 576 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1893)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
46 Pa. 243, 1864 Pa. LEXIS 10, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/campbell-v-baker-pa-1864.