State v. . Moore
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Indictment for obtaining money by false pretenses from J. T. Ritter, tried at the May Term, 1892, of the Superior •Court of Cumberland County, before Boykin, J. John T. Ritter, the prosecutor, testified that he executed a note to defendant in January, 1888, for $500, and afterwards learned that defendant had put it in bank. Witness got a notice from the cashier of the bank that this note, endorsed by E. F. Moore, was due.
Read the full summary
Indictment for obtaining money by false pretenses from J. T. Ritter, tried at the May Term, 1892, of the Superior •Court of Cumberland County, before Boykin, J. John T. Ritter, the prosecutor, testified that he executed a note to defendant in January, 1888, for $500, and afterwards learned that defendant had put it in bank. Witness got a notice from the cashier of the bank that this note, endorsed by E. F. Moore, was due. Witness came to town and went to see defendant about it. Defendant gave witness a blank note to sign, and told witness to go home, and said he would attend to it; that was…
1Opinion of the Court
Avery, J.:
It was essential to the successful prosecution of the indictment to show that the prosecuting witness Ritter was induced by a reasonable reliance upon false representations made by the defendant to pay the latter money to be applied to the gradual extinction of his note theretofore executed. The question that confronts us at the threshold of our investigation is whether the testimony of Ritter tended to prove that any false statement was made by Moore in reference to the ownership of the note which was calculated to deceive or did deceive him, and influence him to pay the money to…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Phillips Walsh v. . Rufus D. HallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1872
- State v. . PhiferSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1871
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. . McFarlandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920