Hinsdale v. . Jerman

20 S.E. 294, 115 N.C. 152
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedSeptember 5, 1894
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 20 S.E. 294 (Hinsdale v. . Jerman) 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
Hinsdale v. . Jerman, 20 S.E. 294, 115 N.C. 152 (N.C. 1894).

Opinion

Pee. Cueiam. :

The note set out in the complaint, with the contemporaneous agreement between the plaintiff and *158 defendant, which the latter put in evidence, constituted the contract between the parties to this action. We think the construction put by his Honor on this written contract was correct, and that the transaction was merely a loan of money, secured by collaterals which have become worthless, thus leaving no course open to the plaintiff to recover the money he loaned to defendant, except to enforce the secondary liability of the maker of the note. It seems to us very evident that he has the right so to do. Affirmed.

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

Related

Sykes v. . Everett
83 S.E. 585 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1914)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
20 S.E. 294, 115 N.C. 152, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hinsdale-v-jerman-nc-1894.