Legal Opinion
Thomas v. Cooksey.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided April 8, 1902PublishedCited by 11 opinions
ActioN by Thomas & Mercer against L. M. Cooksey, heard by Judge O. II. Allen, at October Term, 1901, of the Superior Court of New HaNovee County. From a judgment for the defendant, the plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtFurches, C. J.
This is an action for the possession of certain articles of personal property now in possession of the defendant, commenced in a Justice’s Court. The plaintiffs were the owners of this property, which they let the defendant have, or allowed her to retain, under the following written contract:
“Ledger, No. . . . Salesman, Mercer.
“Thomas & Meeceb,, No. 5 Market Street,
“Wilmington, N. C., September 11, 1899'.
“This certifies that I, Mrs. L. M. Cooksey, have rented of Thomas & Mercer (a firm consisting of A. S. Thomas and W. T. Mercer) one oak suit, one spring, one mattress, thirty-five yards…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- McDowell v. LockhartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
- Wilcox Bros. v. CherrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
- Saunders v. . HattermanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1841
- Foreman v. . DrakeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
- Lytle v. . BirdSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1855
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Colt v. . KimballSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- Hamilton v. . HighlandsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
- J. B. Colt Co. v. KimballSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- Mancuso v. RothenbergNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1961
- In Re Wright Homes, Inc.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1968
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.