Edney v. . King
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal from- an interlocutory order in this case dissolving the injunction, which had before Been granted, made at the Fall Term, 1846, of Henderson Court of Equity,» his Honor Judge Caldwell, presiding: This was an injunction bill.
Read the full summary
Appeal from- an interlocutory order in this case dissolving the injunction, which had before Been granted, made at the Fall Term, 1846, of Henderson Court of Equity,» his Honor Judge Caldwell, presiding: This was an injunction bill. The bill states, that WiU liam Mills died intestate, “ leaving seven children,” and that “the said heirs met, and by common consent divided the personal estate of said intestate, by which division a boy, named George, and a girl, named Nelly, fell to the share of Asa Edney: that the value thereof exceeded one seventh part of the said personal estate, and that “…
1Opinion of the CourtRuffin, C. J.
If the plaintiffs had merits, the bill is so imperfectly framed, that the Court could not afford them the relief they ask, or any part of it. The supposed testator, Asa Edney, (for neither his death nor ■will are stated in the bill,) purchased from the defendant King, the administrator of William Mills, a negro belonging to the estate and gave his bond for the price : and the plaintiffs in this suit seek to be relieved from paying it. On what ground they consider themselves entitled to the relief, it is not easy to say upon their bill. It may be supposed, perhaps, that Asa Edney is entitled…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cited by3 opinions
- McLane v. . ManningSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1864
- Wilson v. . BryanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
- Patton v. . MarrSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1853