Efird v. . Little

CoNNOR, J. The cancellation by the plaintiff of the name of C. I. Moose as an endorser on the note held by him, and sued on in this action, was a material alteration, arid rendered the note void as to all *585 parties thereto, except such as consented to the cancellation. C. S., 3106 and C. S., 3107. Davis v. Coleman, 29 N. C., 426. The defendants, Floyd C. Teeter and H. C. Turner, did not consent to the cancellation or to the substitution of the name of the” defendant, D. L. Crowell, as an endorser for the name of C. I. Moose. For this reason, the note is void as to these defendants, and there is no error in the judgment that plaintiff recover nothing of the defendants, Floyd C. Teeter and H. C. Turner. The defendant, J. A. Little, who was an endorser of the note at the date of its delivery to the plaintiff, consented to the cancellation, and to the substitution of the name of the defendant, D. L. Crowell as an endorser for the name of C. I. Moose, who was an original endorser. For this reason, he was not released from his liability on the note as an endorser by the cancellation and substitution. The note was not rendered void as to this defendant by the alteration, although material. There is no error in the judgment that plaintiff recover of the defendant, J. A. Little, the amount found by the jury to be due on the note. As to him, the judgment is affirmed. The defendant, D. L. Crowell, wrote his name on the back of the note, as an endorser, after the name of 0. I. Moose had been scratched out by the plaintiff. He was not induced to do so by representations made to him by the plaintiff that the cancellation and substitution was satisfactory to the other endorsers, as he alleged in his answer. His liability as an endorser was not affected by the cancellation. He became liable on the note as a general endorser, C. S., 3047, and remained liable as such. There is no error in the judgment that plaintiff recover of the defendant, D. L. Crowell, the amount found by the jury to be due on the note. As to him the judgment is affirmed. The issues submitted to the jury are raised by the pleadings. The answers to these issues support the judgment, which is therefore affirmed. No error.