Forest City Building & Loan Ass'n v. Davis

138 S.E. 338, 193 N.C. 710, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 438
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMay 11, 1927
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 138 S.E. 338 (Forest City Building & Loan Ass'n v. Davis) 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.

Bluebook
Forest City Building & Loan Ass'n v. Davis, 138 S.E. 338, 193 N.C. 710, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 438 (N.C. 1927).

Opinion

Connor, J.

The above-entitled action was tried at October Special Term, 1925, of the Superior Court of Rutherford County.

Prom judgment rendered upon the verdict, both defendants appealed to the Supreme Court. This appeal was heard at Spring Term, 1926. Defendants’ assignments of error were not sustained. The judgment recovered by plaintiff against both defendants was affirmed. 192 N. C., 108.

Petitioner, Massachusetts Bonding and Insurance Company, now contends that this Court failed to consider and pass upon the assignment of error based upon defendants’ exception to the judgment. It contends that there was error in the form of the judgment, in that it does not appear therein that judgment was rendered against it as surety for its codefendant, W. J. Davis. It appears from the petition to rehear that the petitioner has paid the judgment rendered against it. It now asks that the judgment be modified to the end that it may have judgment against defendant W. J. Davis, principal, for the amount so paid.

'Whether, upon the record, such modification is necessary, in order that petitioner may have the relief to which it is entitled as surety need not be discussed. Petitioner is clearly entitled to judgment against its codefendant, W. J. Davis, as principal for the amount which plaintiff has recovered against it as surety on his bond. It is ordered that the judgment be modified in accordance with the prayer of petitioner.

The judgment, as thus modified, is affirmed.

Petition allowed.

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

Related

Henry Angelo & Sons, Inc. v. Property Development Corp., Riverside Associates
306 S.E.2d 162 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1983)
Thomas & Howard Co. of Shelby, Inc. v. American Mutual Liability Insurance
84 S.E.2d 337 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1954)
Maxwell v. Southern Fidelity Mutual Insurance
9 S.E.2d 428 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
138 S.E. 338, 193 N.C. 710, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 438, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/forest-city-building-loan-assn-v-davis-nc-1927.