Crump v. . Black
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Cause removed from the Court of Equity of Mecklenburg County, at the Spring Term 1841L ' In 1S34, Henry Crump, being entitled, in right of his wife, to a distributive share of her father’s estate, con* •traded with one Medlin for the land described in the bill, to be paid for by an assignment of the distributive share, and Medlin, by his direction, executed a deed in fee simple to the wife, under which he and his wife lived upon the land several years.
Read the full summary
Cause removed from the Court of Equity of Mecklenburg County, at the Spring Term 1841L ' In 1S34, Henry Crump, being entitled, in right of his wife, to a distributive share of her father’s estate, con* •traded with one Medlin for the land described in the bill, to be paid for by an assignment of the distributive share, and Medlin, by his direction, executed a deed in fee simple to the wife, under which he and his wife lived upon the land several years. The deed was not registered ; and Crump, by much importunity, prevailed upon her to hand back the deed to Medlin, who was to destroy it, and…
1Opinion of the CourtPearson, J.
The plaintiffs are not entitled to the reliefasked for, because the defendant isa bona fide purchaser for valuable consideration, without notice. When both parties are equally entitled to consideration, Equity does not aid either, but leaves the matter to depend upon the legal title.
The mother of the plaintiffs knew that the object of her husband, in procuring the legal title, was to enable him to sell the land, and they apply to this Court, with but little grace, to lend its aid to the consummation of a fraud upon the purchaser. It is true, married women cannot part with their land, unless…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Tate v. . TateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1834
- Strauss v. WoefelIndiana Court of Appeals · 1921