Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

3 N.C. 402

Simms v. Barefoot's Executors

Superior Court of North Carolina · decided 1806-07-05

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1806-07-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently March 1952

3 state decisions

101806181018201830184018501860187018801890190019101920193019401950decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

TyER curiam.

¶1 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.

¶2 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.

/3/nc/402 · .json · Public domain