Executors of Johnson v. Taylor
Supreme Court of North Carolina
From Edgecombe. Tins 'was an action of 'debt brought on a guardian bond against Taylor, the principal^ and the administrator of Dew, a deceased security. The breach assigned, was the non-payment by the principal to the ward, upon his arrival at age, of the estate to which he was entitled.
Read the full summary
From Edgecombe. Tins 'was an action of 'debt brought on a guardian bond against Taylor, the principal^ and the administrator of Dew, a deceased security. The breach assigned, was the non-payment by the principal to the ward, upon his arrival at age, of the estate to which he was entitled. Among other pleas put in by the administrator of Dew, were the following: first, that his intestate had been dead more than seven years before claim made by the ward ", and secondly, that the ward had not, within three years after coming of age, called on the guardian for a full settlement of his…
1Opinion of the Court
Hah Judge.
The policy of the act of 1795, undoubtedly, is to lighten the burthen of securities and free them from stale demands, when a remedy might have been had if promptly prosecuted against the real debtor.
The intent of the Legislature would not be effectuated if the injunction upon the creditor to call for a full settlement meant a mere call for such a settlement and nothing more. If that is the case, such call, and a total disregard of it by the guardian within three years after the infant’s arrival at full age, would leave the securities in the same situation in which they were before…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Self v. Shugart.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Self v. Shugart.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Self v. Shugart.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904