U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina Court Cases

Search
  1. Murray v. . Marsh (1803)

    Loomis and Tillinghast assigned to the plaintiffs the note sued on, which was made by defendants, and afterwards became bankrupts, and obtained a certificate; and now Loomis is offered as a witness for plaintiffs. He is a competent witness, for he is by the certificate discharged of all debts provable under the commission, and his endorsement to plaintiffs rendered him liable to them, so as to make their demand against him. Secondly, the record of the proceedings against them, attested by the [...]

    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  2. Ogden v. . Nash (1802)

    Defendant pleaded the act of 1715, ch. 48, sec. 9: "Creditors of any person deceased shall make their claim within seven years after the death of such debtor; otherwise, such creditor shall be forever barred." Divers other actions were in court pending upon the same pleadings, and the Court appointed a day for the argument respecting the validity and effect of the plea. On the day appointed an argument was had, and the Court took time to advise; and some days afterwards delivered their [...]

    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  3. Teasdale v. . Branton (1805)

    We must presume, according to the loose practice of this State, that there was a judgment entered pursuant to the verdict, and therefore we must say there is such a record. As to the demurrer for that no devastavit is returned or found to be sure, by the English practice, no sci. fa. lies against the executor, to subject him de bonispropriis, till a devastavit is found upon a scire fieri inquiry, and returned. An Action of debt, however, will lie upon suggestion of adevastavit, and the [...]

    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  4. United States v. . Holtsclaw (1805)

    The objection made by Mr. Seawell, that no one shall speak as to the handwriting of the president and cashier of the bank but one who has seen them write, or has been in the habit of receiving letters from them in a course of correspondence, is not a sound one. These signatures are known to the public, and persons who have been in the habit of distinguishing the genuine from the counterfeit signature, and conversant in dealings for bank bills, are as will qualified to determine of their [...]

    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  5. Gibson v. . Williams (1803)

    So much of the lands as the money secured by the mortgage was worth shall be deemed to have been purchased by the heir by payment of the debts of the ancestor; the surplus of the land shall be estimated as worth at the time of sale in 1801. It must not be valued as worth at the time of descent to the defendant, for the intermediate profits are a recompense for the expenses incident to holding the land, such as taxes and the like.


    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  6. Hamilton v. . Simms (1803)

    This is a debt upon bond against the heir of the obligor; and if the plea of nothing by descent or devise be falsified by verdict, the judgment will be de bonis propriis of the heir or devisee. And it will not


    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  7. Anonymous (1805)

    This is sci. fa. against fail; and plaintiff's counsel urges that he is entitled, against the bail, to interest upon the judgment against the principal. We are of opinion he is not so entitled, for the


    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  8. States v. . Maunier (1792)

    I. The prisoner was a French sailor, and the murder with which he stood charged had been committed upon the high seas; on his landing in North Carolina, he was taken up and committed to jail; from thence he was taken on the next day, brought into court in irons, and examined,


    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  9. Hamilton v. . Eaton (1796)

    Archibald Hamilton and John Hamilton, merchants, of Great Britain, and copartners in trade, under the firm of Archibald Hamilton and Company, complain of John Eaton, surviving obligor of Gabriel Long, dec'd, citizen of and resident within the State and district of North Carolina, and within the jurisdiction of this honorable court, in custody of the Marshal of the said district, etc., of a plea that he render to them eight hundred pounds, proclamation money, of the value of 2,000 dollars, money [...]

    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  10. Whitaker v. . Freeman (1826)

    The declaration, besides the usual introductory averments of good character, etc., alleged a special inducement that the plaintiff was a Congregational clergyman and minister of the gospel, and that the defendant designed to defame him in that character, etc. The declaration then charged the publication of a libel in the form of a letter directed to one H. P., from which particular sentences were selected and stated in various forms, in twenty-five different counts, all exactly alike in the [...]

    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  11. Wilkings v. . Murphey (1803)

    I doubt whether an admission of the debt (283) by an administrator will take the case out of the act of limitations; for the admission presupposes a promise made within three years, and how can this be when the intestate has been dead ten years? If it were true that an admission of the debt did take the case out of the act, and it could not be given in evidence at all unless allowed of upon such a replication, I should think that a strong argument for admitting the evidence. But the premises [...]

    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  12. Jones v. . Walker (1803)

    An appeal from an inferior court of admiralty takes the cause from that court, and such court can no longer act in it. But it still retains power to take care of the goods seized, which are the subject of the suit; and to that end it may order a sale of such goods as are likely to perish. What raised the greatest doubt with us was the uncertainty whether the goods in question were sold by order of the court. The proceedings show that after the appeal the now plaintiff was ordered to pay for [...]

    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  13. McAlister v. . Barry (1803)

    Misrepresentations and obtaining a bargain in consequence thereof disadvantageous to the party deceived by them is a ground in equity for setting aside the conveyance, although the party imposed on were of sound understanding, and had time enough to detect the


    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  14. Sanders v. . Hamilton (1803)

    The jury should assess damages according to the value at the time of recovery; for, supposing he is to have the present value, he should bear the loss in case of the death of the negroes or other loss since the judgment; and, besides, plaintiff's demand arises immediately upon the recovery, and is not to be influenced by after circumstances.


    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  15. Jones v. . Neale Blount (1796)

    1. That it was taken de bene esse only, and therefore could not be read, unless the party offering it first proved that the personal attendance of the witness could not be obtained. But here it appeared that he was within reach of the process of the Court, and in sufficient health to attend.


    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  16. Ward's Case (1793)

    In debt, the plaintiff declared on a bill bearing date in paroch,sanctae Marioe de arcubus in London; and upon oyer of the deed, it bore date at Hamburgh, and the writ was in the Detinet Tantum.


    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  17. Grubbs v. . Clayton (1805)

    This cause was instituted formerly in Wilmington Superior Court. The act of 1715 was pleaded, and thereupon a case was made and stated for the Court of Conference, who decided that the said act of 1715, ch. 48, sec. 9, was in force. Plaintiff's counsel then replied to the plea; and after the replication the whole bill was dismissed on their motion, that is to say, on the motion of plaintiff's counsel. The suit was then instituted in this Court, and defendant's counsel have pleaded the former [...]

    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  18. Bond v. . Allen (1796)

    held that the 4th and 5th sections of that act must be taken together; that the defendant ought to have entitled himself to the benefit of the 4th section by showing he had complied with the requisites in the 5th; and as this was not set forth,


    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  19. Sanders v. . Hamilton (1802)

    NOTE. — See S. c., post, 282.

    (227)


    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
  20. Hamilton v. . Jones (1803)

    The seller impliedly gave power to the vendee to plead such pleas in his name as were necessary for the defense of the land; and should a plea be now put in by Arrington in the name of the vendor, I would not consent to strike it out.


    Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina

1 of 2 Page(s)

Page:
  1. 2