Triplett v. . Witherspoon
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Civil Action-, in the nature of Ljcctment, tried before Furohes, J., at Fall Term, 1875, of the Superior Court of Caldwell county. The case was before this court at January, 1874, and the-facts are fully reported in 70 N. C. Rep., 589. There was a verdict and judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, ■and the defendants appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtReade, J.
If the plaintiffs’ deed had not been lost, and had been registered, their title would have been perfect; for although their deed was fraudulent, as against creditors, and although Witherspoon, the defendants’ intestate, was a purchaser for value, yet, as he purchased with knowledge of the fraudulent conveyance to the plaintiffs, he is bound by it. And this is under our statute of 1840, altering 27th Elizabeth. Hiatt v. Wade, 8 Ired., 340; Triplett v. Witherspoon, 70 N. C. Rep., 589.
But as the plaintiffs’ deed is lost, and has not been registered, the legal title has not vested in them. Bat.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hogan v. . StrayhornSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1871
- Wilson v. . SparksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1875
- Triplett v. WitherspoonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874
3Cited by13 opinions
- Davis v. . InscoeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1881
- Southerland v. . HunterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
- Respass v. . JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
- Hare v. . JerniganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1877
- McMillan v. . EdwardsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1876
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.