that on February 26, 1963, he substituted his note for the Hereford Land Company note and the trial court so found. After American Bank and Trust Company accepted Dr. Sharp's note for the Hereford Land Company note the Bank was paid in full by Dr. Sharp in August, 1968. Thus, the original indebtedness was discharged and the obligations of the guaranty were extinguished since American Bank had then received "payment in full', which took place before plaintiff sued defendant, Mrs. Bowman. The guaranty did not extend to Dr. Sharp as an assignee of Arerican Bank and Trust Company. It was not a continuing contract but one which expired upon a contingency certain — the payment of the note to American Bank and Trust Company. It is unlike the guaranty contract discussed in Thompson v. North Texas National Bank, 37, S.W.2d 735 (Tex.Com.App., 1931) holdings approved by the Supreme Court. As guarantor, Mrs. Bowman, did not bind hereself to pay the note according to the terms thereof as in Tayloe v. Federal Land Bank of Houston, 120 S.W.2d 825 (Beaumont Civ.App., 1938, no writ). Defendant Mrs. Thomas A. Bowman's (the same person as Mrs. Priscilla Bowman) contention the court erred in not rendering judgment that plaintiff take nothing as against her is sustained.

The three appellants sued as guarantors, expressly obligated themselves to perform the contract according to its terms, and thereby adopted the implied provisions stipulating the place of performance. Tayloe v. Federal Land Bank of Houston, Tex.Civ.App., 120 S.W.2d 825; Pullen v. Carpenter, Tex.Civ.App., 83 S.W.2d 384, err. dism. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

" This same thought is carried through a most able opinion by the Beaumont Court of Civil Appeals, in Tayloe v. Federal Land Bank, 120 S.W.2d 825, 826. There, Tayloe executed a note payable to plaintiff in Harris County.