Gordon v. Finlay.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
~i t From Wilkes*. J This was an action of detinue for a slave, tided before-Badger, Judge. On the trial it appeared that the slave in question ber longed to one Gordon, who died in 1806 intestate; administration on his estate was granted to the plaintiff, his widow, and Wesley Gordon, his son, and one of his dis-tributees.
Read the full summary
~i t From Wilkes*. J This was an action of detinue for a slave, tided before-Badger, Judge. On the trial it appeared that the slave in question ber longed to one Gordon, who died in 1806 intestate; administration on his estate was granted to the plaintiff, his widow, and Wesley Gordon, his son, and one of his dis-tributees. It having been ascertained that there were debts due from the estate, more than ordinary perishable property would pay, it was agreed, in 1807, between the plaintiff on the one part, and Wesley Gordon and his brothers and sisters (the other distributees) on the other, that…
1Opinion
The defendant's title is certainly bad, for he derives it from one of two administrators, who sold in satisfaction of his own private debt and at private sale. I think, also, that the plaintiff has no title, nor do I think that the defendant is estopped from showing it. The plaintiff claims the negro in question by virtue of an agreement between her and her coadministrator, Wesley Gordon, which was that she was to pay certain debts of the estate, supposed to be equal in amount to the value of the negro, and take the negro as her own property; and this agreement was made with the consent of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Froneberger v. . LewisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1878
- Doe on Dem. McLeod v. McCallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1855
- Mangum v. . SimmsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1814