Smith v. . Andrews
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal from the Superior Court of Law of Bladen County, at the Fall Term, 1847, his Honor Judge Caldwell presiding. This was an action on the case for a deceit on the part of the defendant, in trading a note to the plaintiff for a horse.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Superior Court of Law of Bladen County, at the Fall Term, 1847, his Honor Judge Caldwell presiding. This was an action on the case for a deceit on the part of the defendant, in trading a note to the plaintiff for a horse. It appeared in evidence, that a conversation took place between the parties about the trade of a note held by the defendant on one - and endorsed by one Worthington, for sixty-eight dollars, in which the defendant said the note was perfectly good. This conversation took place at the bouse of the plaintiff, and, shortly after, the parties went to look at the…
1Opinion of the CourtDaniel, J.
The first part of his Honor’s charge to the jury is unobjectionable, and right in law; but when he proceeded to say, “ though it might be true, that the plaintiff agreed to take the note at his own risk, yet if he was ignorant of the condition of the parties to the note, and the defendant knew it and concealed it, it would be a fraud ón the plaintiff, and he would be entitled to their verdict,” we think he eri’ed.
In the case of Mellish v. Matteux, Peaks’ N. P. cases 115, Lord Kenyon laid down the law as his Honor did in this case ; for he said, “ with all faults” means with all faults unknown…
2Cited by1 opinion
- L. J. Smith Construction Co. v. MullinsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1918