27 Ind. 489 | Ind. | 1867
Suit upon a joint and several note, signed by the appellants and one Jemes Galvin. Answer by appellants, that they were sureties /upon the note, and were discharged by an extension of time granted to the principal, for a valuable consideration, and without their consent. A reply was filed in denial. Trial, and finding for the appellee.
' On the trial, it was shown that the appellee knew, at the time he took the note, that the appellants were sureties. The note was dated July 1, 1864, and became due twelve months thereafter. It was then agreed between the appel
In the case of Redman v. Deputy, 26 Ind. 338, it was held that a “contract of forbearance was not void for usury,” under the act of March 7, 1861, on the subject of interest. 2 G. & H., p. 656. Under that ruling, the appellants wore entitled to judgment in the case under, consideration.
The judgment is reversed, with costs, and the cause remanded for further proceedings.