Harper v. . Spainhour
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Bill in equity, coming before MiteheTl, J., upon an exception to a report, at Spring Term 1870 of Caldwell Court. No other statement is required than what appears in the Opinion. The exception of the plaintiffs to the report having been overruled, they appealed. Treating the parties to the covenant as vendor and vendee, the Court will not divest the vendor’s title before he is indemnified according to the contract: 1 Story Eq. Jur. s. 742; Lloyd v. Wheatley, 2 Jon.
Read the full summary
Bill in equity, coming before MiteheTl, J., upon an exception to a report, at Spring Term 1870 of Caldwell Court. No other statement is required than what appears in the Opinion. The exception of the plaintiffs to the report having been overruled, they appealed. Treating the parties to the covenant as vendor and vendee, the Court will not divest the vendor’s title before he is indemnified according to the contract: 1 Story Eq. Jur. s. 742; Lloyd v. Wheatley, 2 Jon. Eq. 267. Treating Spainhour as a surety, there is a peculiar relation between Oloyd and himself, which warrants the report: 1…
1Opinion of the Court
Peaeson, O. J.
Cloyd, the intestate of the plaintiff, executed a covenant, by which the defendant was to convey to Cloyd the house and lot mentioned in the pleadings, when certain work was done by Cloyd for the defendant. The covenant was deposited with a third person for safe keeping. Afterwards, the parties agreed by parol, that the covenant should be held, in order to indemnify the defendant for becoming, with one Jones, co-surety for Cloyd on a note of $100, to one Sudderth.
The exception makes this point: Does a parol agreement, by one having an equitable estate subject to the payment of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Cardwell v. . CardwellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1870
- Personette v. PrymeNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1881