Honeycut v. Angel
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was an action of trespass oi>i the case, tried at Yancy, on the Fall circuit of 1837, before his honor Judge Settle. The declaration contained two counts.
Read the full summary
This was an action of trespass oi>i the case, tried at Yancy, on the Fall circuit of 1837, before his honor Judge Settle. The declaration contained two counts. The first stated two writs oifieri facias, issued by a justice of the peace for the county of Buncombe, and directed to any lawful officer of said county, commanding him to levy of the goods and chattels of the plaintiff, Honeycut, two debts of $2:16 and $2:05 cents respectively, besides costs, &c., before then recovered by one Joseph Ray, against the said plaintiff, before a justice of the peace of the said county, and to have the…
1Opinion of the Court
Ruffin, Chief Justice,
after stating the case as above, proceeded: On the part of the defendant, it has been contended that there ought to be a venire de novo, because it is obvious that there was no evidence applicable'to the first count, and because, upon the second count, the damages assessed could be prop'er only in the case, that the plaintiff was the owner in fee of the land, and had been deprived, by means of the defendant’s conduct, both of the possession and property in it— neither of which circumstances appear to have existed,
The Court, however, is of opinion that the judgment cannot…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Moore v. . EdmistonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874
- Hatton v. . DewSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1814