midpage

Simms v. Barefoot's ExecutorsSimms v. Barefoot's Executors

Superior Court of North Carolina
Jul 5, 1806
Reporters:
Before:
TyEr
TyER curiam.

Evidence cannot be given to prove that the sos of one of the ‍‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‍obligors was in duress, and that she executed the deed to procure his enlargement; and that the other obligor executed as her surety ; for the ‍‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‍duress of the son, who is a stranger to him, shall not render his deed invalid. He relied upon Cro. 2 Ba. Ab.

Quere — If the surety be ‍‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‍compelled to pay the money, cannot lie recover of the mother, who induced him to become surety upon an implied promise of indemnification? And if he can ‍‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‍re-cover, it seems useless to say the mother shall be discharged ra the first instance, but not him ; for that makes her liable indirectly to ‍‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‍what she cannot be more so directly: either both should be discharged or neither.

Case Details

Case Name: Simms v. Barefoot's Executors
Court Name: Superior Court of North Carolina
Date Published: Jul 5, 1806
Citation: 3 N.C. 402
Court Abbreviation: Sup. Ct. N.C.
Log In