Kent v. Hair

4 S.E.2d 703, 60 Ga. App. 652, 1939 Ga. App. LEXIS 130

Opinion

Felton, J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) Assuming that the Tennessee statute is open to the construction that the release of a cosurety or co-obligor does not release the other surety or obligor when the parties other than those not released stipulate that such other surety or obligor be not released, such a construction is contrary to the public policy of this State, as expressed by the Code, §§ 20-910, 103-201, and will not be enforced. Code, § 102-110; Shore Acres Properties Inc. v. Morgan, 44 Ga. App. 128 (160 S. E. 705); Sally v. Bank of Union, 150 Ga. 281 (3) (103 S. E. 400); Ulman, Magill & Jordan Woolen Co. v. Magill, 155 Ga. 555 (117 S. E. 657). It is unnecessary to pass upon the other assignments of error. The court did not err in dismissing the action on the motion in the nature of a general demurrer.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens, P. J., concurs. Sutton, J., concurs specially.