Code of Alabama

Ala. Code § 8-3-13 (2026)

Surety May Require Creditor to Bring Action Against Principal; Discharge of Surety Upon Failure to Bring Action.

✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaAla. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) A surety upon any contract for the payment of money or for the delivery or payment of personal property may require the creditor or anyone having the beneficial interest in the contract, by notice in writing, to bring an action thereon against the principal debtor or against any cosurety to such contract.

(b) If an action is not brought thereon in three months after the receipt of such notice and prosecuted with diligence according to the ordinary course of law, the surety giving such notice is discharged from all liability as surety or his aliquot proportion of the debt, as the case may be.

(d) The remedy secured by this section does not apply to bonds or other contracts with collateral conditions, nor to the bonds of executors, administrators, guardians, or public officers.

(Code 1852, §§2647, 2648; Code 1867, §§3074, 3075; Code 1876, §§3414, 3415; Code 1886, §§3153, 3154; Code 1896, §§3884, 3885; Code 1907, §§5396, 5397; Code 1923, §§9555, 9556; Code 1940, T. 9, §§89, 90.)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2021 · leading case: Dionne v. First Alabama Bank (In Re XYZ Options, Inc.), 217 B.R. 912 (Bankr. N.D. Ala. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Dionne v. First Alabama Bank (In Re XYZ Options, Inc.), 217 B.R. 912 (Bankr. N.D. Ala. 1998). · cites it 10× “Not to be overlooked is the enactment of exoneration by the Alabama legislature as a portion of the Code of Alabama 1975: Ala. Code § 8-3-13 (1993). Although the statutory version has certain exceptions not relevant to this Court’s holding, it allows a surety to require a…”

Wiggins v. FDIC (N.D. Ala. 2020). · cites it 2× “For example, the court noted that “Wiggins and 12 It appears the reference to “§ 58-3-13” is a typo and should read “§ 8-3-13.” (Doc. 183 at 44). Peacock’s obligations under the Guaranties cannot be affected or terminated by either the Pledge Agreement between Ellis, Raley, and…”

Wiggins v. FDIC (N.D. Ala. 2021). · cites it 2× “Specifically, Peacock seeks release: (1) pursuant to the “2007 Loan Documents and Agreements” (Count I); (2) as a surety pursuant to § 8-3-13 of the Alabama Code (Count II); and (3) pursuant to a series of loans, modifications, and extensions, as well as impairment of collateral…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.