Harrison v. Garner

Decision Date14 February 1916
Citation110 Miss. 586,70 So. 700
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
PartiesHARRISON ET AL v. GARNER

October 1915

APPEAL from the circuit court of Simpson County. HON. W. H. HUGHES Judge.

Suit by I. Garner against S.D. Harrison and others. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal.

Appellee complainant in the court below, filed suit on a promissory note for three hundred dollars with interest and attorney's fees, against appellants, S.D. Harrison, Ed Ware, and Dr. L. E. Robinson. The defendants pleaded the general issue, and the defendants Robinson and Ware gave notice that they would show that they were sureties only, and that the holder of the note at the request of Harrison, the principal, had extended the note for a valuable consideration without their knowledge or consent, thereby releasing the sureties. Defendant Harrison pleaded payment to the extent of one hundred dollars principal and forty dollars interest. On the trial defendants Ware and Robinson offered testimony in support of their plea and requested a peremptory instruction as to their liability, which was refused. At a request of plaintiff the court gave the following instructions:

"The court instructs the jury, for the plaintiff, that they must find for the plaintiff in the sum of two hundred dollars and ten per cent. interest on the same from November, 1912; and the court further charges the jury, for the plaintiff, that unless they believe from the evidence that defendant paid the plaintiff the sum of one hundred dollars principal and interest up to November, 1912, it is their duty to find for the plaintiff in the full amount sued for, to wit, three hundred dollars with interest at ten per cent. per annum from November 1, 1912, to this date, and thirty dollars attorney's fee, or a total of three hundred and eighty-five dollars."

The jury returned the verdict for three hundred and eighty-five dollars, and judgment for that amount was rendered jointly against all three defendants, and they appeal.

Reversed and remanded.

John P Edwards, for appellants.

An agreement by the holder of a note to extend for a definite period the time of payment, in consideration of the promise of the principal debtor to pay interest on the debt during such extension, constitutes a binding contract of forbearance, and will operate to discharge the sureties who do not agree to the extension. Moore v. Redding, 69 Miss. 841.

Both of the other defendants as well and S.D. Harrison testify that the plaintiff did not ever obtain the consent of said sureties to have the time of the payment of this note extended, neither did Harrison ever obtain the consent of said sureties or mention such a thing to them. The sureties did not know but that the note had been paid, and both testify that Harrison was solvent at the maturity of the note, and that after the extension of the time for...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Mississippi Cent. R. Co. v. Roberts
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • April 8, 1935
    ...... find for appellees. . . 14 R. C. L. 793; Lackey v. R. R. Co., 102 Miss. 339, 59. So. 97; Harrison v. Garner, 110 Miss. 586, 70 So. 700; Bank v. Hulsey, 112 Miss. 632, 73 So. 621;. Owen v. Anderson, 119 Miss. 66, 80 So. 386; Dent. v. ......
  • Ivy v. Evans
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • July 2, 1923
    ...... Levin v. Dietz, 20 L. R. A. (N. S.) 251;. Coldblast Transportation Co. v. Kansas City Bolt & Nut. Co., 11 F. 77, 57 L. R. A. 696; Harrison v. Cage, 5 Mod. 4118. Other authorities are cited in 1. Williston On Contracts, note 72, page 214; Comstock v. North, 88 Miss. 754; Kolb v. ... Moore v. Redding, 69. Miss. 841; Kern v. Andrews, 59 Miss. 39; Brown. v. Prophit, 53 Miss. 649; Harrison v. Garner, . 110 Miss. 586; Lyon v. Sanders, et al., 23 Miss. 530, at 587. In the brief of Mr. Roberds, he calls attention. to the necessity of ......
  • Jackson v. Leggett
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • May 29, 1939
  • New Orleans & N.E. R. Co. v. James
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • June 9, 1930
    ...... . . Miss. Digest, Trial, sec. 253; Lackey v. St. Louis & S. F. R. Co., 102 Miss. 339; Harrison v. Garner, 110. Miss. 586; Bank v. Hulsey, 112 Miss. 632; Owen. v. Anderson, 119 Miss. 66; Reid v. Yazoo, etc., R. Co., 94 Miss. 639; Yazoo, etc., ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT