Horne v. Bodwell
Opinion
It was competent for the defendant to show that he was a surety only, and that the plaintiff knew it. Carpenter v. King, 9 Met. 511. An agreement with the principal, for a consideration, to give time, and not to sue him within a time limited, discharges the surety. Greely v. Dow, 2 Met. 176. But mere omission to sue the principal will not discharge a surety. Hunt v. Bridgham, 2 Pick. 581.
And the court are of opinion that the averment in the answer was sufficient to let in this proof, especially as the plaintiff did not object to the proof when offered.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
71 Mass. 457 (Horne v. Bodwell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.