Symington v. . McLin
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was an action of assumpsit, to which the defendant pleaded the general issue, payment, and set-off; upon the issues joined on which the case was tried at Jones, on the Fall Circuit of 1834, before his Honor Judge Norwood.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, to which the defendant pleaded the general issue, payment, and set-off; upon the issues joined on which the case was tried at Jones, on the Fall Circuit of 1834, before his Honor Judge Norwood. From the evidence given on the trial it appeared, that the plaintiff was a commission merchant in the city of Baltimore ; and that the defendant was indebted to him in the sum of two hundred and seventy-one dollars and ten cents; and being called on by the plaintiff’s agent in May, 1828, he promised to make payment in cotton, or the proceeds thereof, some of which he…
1Opinion of the Court
Ruffin, Chief Justice.
— The complaint of the defendant’s counsel, that his Honor left the nature of the instructions given to the plaintiff to be determined by the jury, is probably well founded. On a similar question Lord Mansfield observed, in Macbeath v. Haldimand, 1 Term Rep. 172, that there was no evidence proper for the jury; for as it consisted of written documents and letters not denied, the import of them was matter of law. But the error did the defendant no harm; for, upon looking into the letter of advice, we think the defendant was not instructed to sell for cash. A factor may…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Whitbeck v. Van NessNew York Supreme Court · 1814
- Booth v. SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1829
- Beebee v. RobertNew York Supreme Court · 1834
- Breed v. Cook & CadwellNew York Supreme Court · 1818
3Cited by3 opinions
- Chard v. . WarrenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
- Golden v. . LevySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1814
- Southern Engineering Co. v. BoydSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926