Gregory v. . Hooker
Supreme Court of North Carolina
¡>From Halifax The Plaintiff brought suit against the Defendant in Halifax County Court, returnable to August term, 1810, when the Defendant pleaded, “Fully administered, no assets, judgment, bonds, &c. no assets ultra, property sold under act of assembly, and the money net yet due.”
Read the full summary
¡>From Halifax The Plaintiff brought suit against the Defendant in Halifax County Court, returnable to August term, 1810, when the Defendant pleaded, “Fully administered, no assets, judgment, bonds, &c. no assets ultra, property sold under act of assembly, and the money net yet due.” The case was taken to the Superior Court, and at April term, 1812, the Defendant moved for leave to add, as of November term, 1810. of the County Court, a plea, 4S Since the last continuance, that the residue of the property had been sold under the act of Assembly,” and founded his motion on an affidavit, which…
1Opinion of the CourtHaux., Judge
ft ¡nay be a hard case,on the Defendant, if he shall lr.iviv the Piaintilf’s debt to pay out of his own pocket; but the truth of the plea of “ fully administered,” in point of time, must be tested when process is served, or when pleaded,- after that time the Defendant is not at liberty to dispose of the property, under the acts of Assfembly alluded to in the affidavit, although it was proper to do so before. ThOse acts* of Assembly did not intend to deprive a creditor of the lien, which the commencement of an action might give him on the goods of the deceased. He can sell only before that…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Littlejohn v. . UnderhillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1816
- Gregory v. . HookerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1815