Rushmore v. Miller
4 Edw. Ch. 84 | New York Court of Chancery | 1843
The Vice-Chancellor, decided that a surety, in such a case as the above, could not claim notice or a demand; and might be introduced as a defendant to fix him for any deficiency, without it.
Although the late case of Gillett v. Balcom, 6 Barb. S. C. Rep. 370 has reference to a mortgage made on demand, yet it may be well to refer the reader to it.