Rooks v. . Moore
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was an action of trover, brought to recover the value of eight barrels of turpentine. On the trial before his Honor, Judge Caldwell, at New Hanover Special Court, in June 1852, the case was as follows: The plaintiff being the owner of a tract of land on which were pine trees cut for the purpose of dipping turpentine, agreed with one Black that he might cultivate the trees and dip the turpentine, and have the boxes for a year— Black promising to pay him therefor…
Read the full summary
This was an action of trover, brought to recover the value of eight barrels of turpentine. On the trial before his Honor, Judge Caldwell, at New Hanover Special Court, in June 1852, the case was as follows: The plaintiff being the owner of a tract of land on which were pine trees cut for the purpose of dipping turpentine, agreed with one Black that he might cultivate the trees and dip the turpentine, and have the boxes for a year— Black promising to pay him therefor one-fourth of the turpentine, and to apply the residue to the satisfaction of a debt for which the 'plaintiff was bound as his…
1Opinion of the CourtPearson, J.
If Black was a hireling,- whose wages were to be paid by an allowance of a certain part of the turpentine made by him, then the whole of the turpentine belonged to the plaintiff, until he delivered over to Black his share, as wages.
If Black was a lessee of the trees for one year, and, by way of rent, was to deliver to the plaintiff one-fourth - of the turpentine made, then the whole belonged to Black until he delivered over to the plaintiff his share, as rent.
The case states, that the “ plaintiff agreed with Black that he might cultivate the trees and dip the turpentine, and have the boxes…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Patterson v. . AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938