Case ID: ohio-law-abs_3/html/0056-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "RICHARDS, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 101
    BENDLIN, et al. v. MILLER RUBBER CO.
    Ohio Appeals, 6th Dist., Lucas Co.
    No. 1479.
    Decided Dec. 8, 1924
    587. GUARANTY—Guarantors on continuing guaranty limited to sum stated held not relieved from liability unless limiting total indebtedness.
    Published only in Ohio Law Abstract
    Attorneys—Eldon H. Young, for Bendlin, et al; Miller & Wall, for the Rubber Company; all of Toledo.
   RICHARDS, J.

Epitomized Opinion

Reagan had been purchasing rubber from the Miller Rubber Co. and in order to obtain credit induced Adam Bendlin and Ottilie Bend-lin to sign the guaranty. It was, in form, a continuing guaranty, the liability of the guarantors, however, being limited to the sum of $3,500. As Reagan defaulted in the payment for certain goods, which amounted to more than $3,500, the Miller Rubber Co. sued the guarantors. As both parties made a motion for a directed verdict, the court directed a verdict in favor of plaintiff in the amount of $1,868.07. The defendants prosecuted error. In sustaining the judgment, the court of appeals held:

1. The guarantors were not relieved from liability because the guaranty limited the sum to $3,500 as the guaranty contained no requirement that the total indebtedness should be limited to $3,500 or any other sum.