Harrell, Administrator C. v. . Watson and Others
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Debt, tried before Pool, J., at Spring Term 1869 of the Superior Court of HERTFORD. Tbe plaintiff declared upon a plain bond, “ for value received ” promising to pay to Mm one thousand dollars, with interest from date, and dated the 26th day of September, A. D. 1864. The defendants pleaded General issue, Payment and Set off.
Read the full summary
Debt, tried before Pool, J., at Spring Term 1869 of the Superior Court of HERTFORD. Tbe plaintiff declared upon a plain bond, “ for value received ” promising to pay to Mm one thousand dollars, with interest from date, and dated the 26th day of September, A. D. 1864. The defendants pleaded General issue, Payment and Set off. The bond had been given in part payment of the price oí a slave, purchased by -Watson at an Administrator’s sale by the plaintiff, in Hertford county on the day of the date. The terms of sale were, that purchasers might pay in Confederate currency, to the amount of…
1Opinion of the Court
PeáRSON, C. J.
We listened with pleasure to the argument of Mr. Teates. He was candid, and seems to have investigated the subject with much diligence; but we cannot concur in his conclusions.
He says, the bond is void for want of a consideration. The reply is: 1st. A bond needs no consideration. The solemn act of sealing and delivering is a deed, a thing done, which, by the rule of the common law, has full force and effect, without any consideration. Nudum pactum applies only-to simple contracts — deeds need no consideration, except such as take effect under the doctrine of uses, or such as are…
2Cited by18 opinions
- Brown v. . KinseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879
- Thomason v. . BescherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
- McGowan v. BeachSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- Electrova Co. v. Spring Garden InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
- Samonds v. CloningerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.