Brodie v. . Batchelor
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was a Civil ActioN, oa-a money demands, commenced an a Justice’s Court, and carried by appeal to ‘the Superior Court of Wake and there heard before his Honor, Judge Watts,at June Term, 1876, upon a The following are the substantial facts: Batchelor, the defendant, borrowed of the plaintiff Brodie, one hundred and sixty-five dollars, giving the other defendants as sureties.
Read the full summary
This was a Civil ActioN, oa-a money demands, commenced an a Justice’s Court, and carried by appeal to ‘the Superior Court of Wake and there heard before his Honor, Judge Watts,at June Term, 1876, upon a The following are the substantial facts: Batchelor, the defendant, borrowed of the plaintiff Brodie, one hundred and sixty-five dollars, giving the other defendants as sureties. This money was obtained to pay for a lot in Warren-ton, which was done, and the title went to Batchelor and wife. Failing to repay the money to the plaintiff at the time appointed, he Was warranted 'and the plaintiff…
1Opinion of the CourtBynum, J.
In Whitaker v. Elliot, 73 N. C. Rep., 186, Whitaker was the bargainor and Elliot the bargainee, who in payment for the land, gave the plaintiff notes of third per.' sons, which he endorsed and thus made his own. Then it was held that these notes were obligations contracted for the purchase of the premises, and that the defendant was not ■entitled to homestead against their payment.
In this case the plaintiff, Brodie, was not the bargainor.. The defendant purchased of a third person, who has received the purchase money, executed a deed, and has no cause of complaint. The bargainor is out of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Whitaker v. . ElliottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1875
3Cited by3 opinions
- Wilhelm v. LocklarSupreme Court of Florida · 1903
- Lawson v. . PringleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
- Craven v. HartleySupreme Court of Florida · 1931