Johnson v. . Knight
Supreme Court of North Carolina
vFrom Ausou. J The special case was this: Johnston, the Plaintiff, w as the subscribing witness to the bond on which this action of debt was brought; and on the trial, lie proved that the Defendants- had acknowledged the execution of the bond ; that one of them had promised to pay it, and the other had said he expected to have it to pay, and it would ruin him. The question submitted to this court was, whether this was a sufficient proof of the execution of the bond.
1Opinion of the CourtLocke, Judge
' It has already been decided by this Court, and between this plaintiff and the defendants, that it is improper to receive evidence of the hand writing of the subscribing witness, who was the Plaintiff, and had taken a voluntary assignment of the bond in question. The case is again submitted upon another question, to wit:— Whether the acknowledgment of the defendants, that, had given the bond and would pay it, be legal and pr0per evidence to be left to a jury to prove its execution. This point is expressly decided in the case of Abbott v. Plumb, (Doug. 216, 217 ;) and in the case of Cunliffe…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Billingsly v. . KnightSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1817