Moore v. . Shields .
Supreme Court of North Carolina
After the decision of this case at the last term (sec. 68, N. C. Rep., 327) it was referred to Spier Whitaker, Esq., as a referee, to state an account between the defendent W. PI. Jones and his wards, who were the heirs-at-law of J. H. Harrison, and upon his report being returned to the present term of the Court, exceptions to it were filed by Jones and the defendant Medora Harrison.
Read the full summary
After the decision of this case at the last term (sec. 68, N. C. Rep., 327) it was referred to Spier Whitaker, Esq., as a referee, to state an account between the defendent W. PI. Jones and his wards, who were the heirs-at-law of J. H. Harrison, and upon his report being returned to the present term of the Court, exceptions to it were filed by Jones and the defendant Medora Harrison. The character of the exceptions sufficiently appears in the opinion of the Court which disposes of them.
1Opinion of the CourtRodman, J.
1st Excepiton: The view of the referee as to .the accounts of the guardian against his wards for goods sold to them by him before his bankruptcy is in the main correct. It is a settled principle that if a guardian buys up the claim of a creditor of his ward for less than its amount, he cannot charge his ward with more than he actually pays. If the guardian in this case had not been originally the creditor, and had not bought from his own assignee, the application of the principle would probably not have been disputed. But these circumstances have no real weight to take the case out of the…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Robbins v. . KillebrewSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
- In Re Will of HowellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
- State v. ConlySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1902
- Outland v. . OutlandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
- Supreme Lodge Knights of Honor v. SelbySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.