Locke v. . Alexander
Supreme Court of North Carolina
From Cabarrus. This was an action of covenant. On the 10th of May, 1810, the Defendants executed to one Merrill, an instrument of writing, which, after reciting that the Defendants acted in the execution of the instrument, in their own behalf, and as attorneys in fact for John Springs and Sarah his wife, John M’Coy and Catharine his wife, and Cunningham Harris and Mary his wife, witnessed, that the Defendants, “ as attorneys aforesaid,” received the consideration money, and…
Read the full summary
From Cabarrus. This was an action of covenant. On the 10th of May, 1810, the Defendants executed to one Merrill, an instrument of writing, which, after reciting that the Defendants acted in the execution of the instrument, in their own behalf, and as attorneys in fact for John Springs and Sarah his wife, John M’Coy and Catharine his wife, and Cunningham Harris and Mary his wife, witnessed, that the Defendants, “ as attorneys aforesaid,” received the consideration money, and conveyed to Merrill in fee simple, certain lands, and all the estate, right, title, in-Merest, claim and demand and…
1Opinion of the Court
This case presents difficulties to the plaintiff's right of recovery on the merits, and I am not prepared to solve them. It is very doubtful whether anything, as between the parties, passed by the deed. In the first part of the premises it is said to be a deed between Isaac and Charles T. Alexander, in their own behalf, and as attorneys for Springs, Harris and M'Coy, in right of their respective wives (naming them), of the one part, and Jonathan Merrill of the other, and witnesseth: that the said Isaac and Charles T., as agents and attorneys as aforesaid, in consideration of two thousand…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Potts v. . LazarusSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1815