McNeeley v. . Hart
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal from the Superior Court of Law of Iredell County', at the Spring Term 1849, his Honor Judge Ellis presiding. This was an action of trover, brought to recover damages for the conversion of a parcel of oats and corn, alleged to be the property of the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Superior Court of Law of Iredell County', at the Spring Term 1849, his Honor Judge Ellis presiding. This was an action of trover, brought to recover damages for the conversion of a parcel of oats and corn, alleged to be the property of the plaintiff. To prove property, the plaintiff offered a bill of sale, from one Irwin, of all his interest in the crop of corn and oats, then growing on the land of Samuel Hart, the defendant, executed June 1st, 1844. The said Irwin was introduced by the plaintiff and swore, that he had agreed with the defendant to work in the crop with him in…
1Opinion of the CourtPeausox, J.
We concur in the opinion of the Judge below, for the reasons given by him. Irwin, the cropper, had a mere executory contract, a chose in action, which could not be assigned. State v. Jones, 2 Dev. & Bat. 544.
It was very ingeniously argued for the plaintiff, that, yielding the question as to the corn, he. was entitled to recover for the oats, upon the doctrine of estoppel; for although the bill of sale was executed before the oats were cut, yet as Irwin’s share was afterwards allotted and stacked to itself, it thereby became vested in Irwin. This act of appropriation fed the estoppel, and thus…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State v. . AustinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
- Haskins v. . RoysterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874
- O'Brien v. WebbDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1921