Cal. Codes » Civil Code / DIVISION 3. OBLIGATIONS / PART 4. OBLIGATIONS ARISING FROM PARTICULAR TRANSACTIONS / TITLE 13. SURETYSHIP / ARTICLE 6. Exoneration of Sureties
California Codes

Cal. Civil Code § 2819 (2026)

Exoneration of Sureties

✓ leginfo export of Sept. 26, 2026 (applied Oct. 1, 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A surety is exonerated, except so far as he or she may be indemnified by the principal, if by any act of the creditor, without the consent of the surety the original obligation of the principal is altered in any respect, or the remedies or rights of the creditor against the principal, in respect thereto, in any way impaired or suspended. However, nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede subdivision (b) of Section 2822.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 43 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1951–2026 · leading case: Cates Constr., Inc. v. Talbot Partners, 980 P.2d 407 (Cal. 1999).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cates Constr., Inc. v. Talbot Partners, 980 P.2d 407 (Cal. 1999). · cites it 2× “The unique substantive aspects of surety relationships and surety bonds are addressed in a number of Civil Code provisions.”
Regents of Univ. of California v. Hartford Accident & Indem. Co., 581 P.2d 197 (Cal. 1978). · cites it 2× “[14] Civil Code section 2819 provides that "A surety is exonerated .”
In re Chemtura Corp., 448 B.R. 635 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2011). · cites it 4× “” 70 Cal. Civ.Code § 2819 provides that a surety “is exonerated if the promisee alters the principal obligation in any respect or impairs or suspends the promisee’s rights or remedies against the principal, unless the surety consents or is indemnified by the principal.”
United States v. John N. Grayson Dorothy L. Grayson, 879 F.2d 620 (9th Cir. 1989). · cites it 2× “Thus, no rational trier of fact could find in favor of the Graysons on the grounds that the EDA’s actions breached the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, interfered with the economic relationship between Univox and the Graysons or exonerated them from liability under…”
Torrey Pines Bank v. Superior Court, 216 Cal. App. 3d 813 (Cal. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “" Civil Code section 2819 provides: "A surety is exonerated, except so far as he may be indemnified by the principal, if by any act of the creditor, without the consent of the surety the original obligation of the principal is altered in any respect, or the remedies or rights of…”
Ferraro v. Pac. Fin. Corp., 8 Cal. App. 3d 339 (Cal. Ct. App. 1970). · cites it 2× “Although the lender could waive its own interest in the automobile, it could not release the rights which the dealer had, in what had been intended to be the security for the performance of the original purchaser's loan, without forfeiting its rights against the dealer.”
United Pac. Ins. v. United States Dep't of the Interior, 70 F. Supp. 2d 1089 (C.D. Cal. 1999). · cites it 6× “UPIC argues again that under California Civil Code section 2819, it is exonerated from performance under the Bond.”
R. P. Richards, Inc. v. Chartered Constr. Corp., 83 Cal. App. 4th 146 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000). “The trial court concluded that the original obligation had been altered without Travelers’s consent thereby exonerating Travelers as surety (Civ. Code, § 2819), 2 granted Travelers’s motion in limine to exclude all evidence other than the settlement agreement, and entered…”
Cent. Bldg., LLC v. Cooper, 127 Cal. App. 4th 1053 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005). “8 Civil Code section 2819 provides in relevant part: “A surety is exonerated .”
City of Sacramento v. Trans Pac. Indus., Inc., 98 Cal. App. 3d 389 (Cal. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “(Civ. Code, § 2819.) In the alternative, Fireman’s urges it was not indemnified by TPI within the meaning of Civil Code section 2819 which provides that “[a] surety is exonerated, except so far as he may be indemnified by the principal, if by any act of the creditor.”
Union Bank v. Ross, 54 Cal. App. 3d 290 (Cal. Ct. App. 1976). “613 ; Civ. Code, §§2819,2845) the Rosses waived their rights under Civil Code sections 2819 and 2845.”
In re Charles Alcock Betty Alcock, Debtors. Charles Alcock Betty Alcock v. Small Bus. Admin., 50 F.3d 1456 (9th Cir. 1995). “1989), this Court found that a party had waived its impairment defenses under Cal.Civil Code § 2819 by granting the Economic Development Agency "full power to deal in any manner with the liabilities or the collateral,” as stated in the guaranty agreement.”
Show all 43 citing cases →
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.