Hauser v. . Shore
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Cause removed from the Court of Equity of Stokes County, at the Fall Term 1848. After the decision of June Term 1843, 2 Ired Eq. 5G5, this cause was remanded, and it has since been revived against the administrators of Conrad, and sent here again.
Read the full summary
Cause removed from the Court of Equity of Stokes County, at the Fall Term 1848. After the decision of June Term 1843, 2 Ired Eq. 5G5, this cause was remanded, and it has since been revived against the administrators of Conrad, and sent here again. It is now ascertained, that Lehman, as well as Henry Shore, the executors of Henry Shore, the elder, is insolvent ; and the object of the present preceding is to ren" der Conrad liable for the value, or the price of land he purchased. The bill was originally filed by Simon Peter Hauser and his wife Mary Barbara, and their children, and was amended…
1Opinion of the CourtRuffin, C. J.
The first ground, on which it is sought to change Conrad, is, that he was bound to see to the application of the purchase money of the land.
If the case stood on the seventh clause of the will, by itself, and the bill had been filed by the daughters Mary Harris, and Magdalene alone, it would have raised the question, on which opposite opinions have • been expressed in modern times by eminent lawyers : namely, whether a purchaser is bound to see to the application of the purchase money further than to place it in the' hands, which the owner of the estate appointed to receive it. The position…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Denson v. Pine State Creamery Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- Rogerson v. . LeggettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
- Smith v. McIntyreCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1899
- Kadis v. . WeilSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913