Royston v. Howie
This text of 15 Ala. 309 (Royston v. Howie) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The precise point involved in this case was decided by this court, in Bradford and Sawyer, 6 Ala. Rep. 572, where the court held the security was not discharged by an arrangement between the execution creditor and principal debtor, similar to the one here complained of. See also, Agee v. Steele, 8 Ala. Rep. 948; Armistead v. Thomas, 9 Ib. 586; Gilder v. Jeter, 11 Ib. 256, and The Bank v. Godden et al. at this term.- That the creditor, under a mistaken view of his legal rights said he had discharged the sureties by the arrangement, cannot estop him from showing the truth of the matter, and from availing himself of their liability to satisfy his demand.
Let the judgment be reversed, and the cause remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
15 Ala. 309, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/royston-v-howie-ala-1849.