Legal Opinion

Neale v. . Haddock

Superior Court of North Carolina

Decided July 5, 1802Published

1Opinion of the Court

It is perfectly well settled that the husband is not entitled to the remainder of a chattel belonging to the wife at the time of the intermarriage. (186)

Verdict for plaintiff.

Quere de hoc.

NOTE. — See the note to Lewis v. Hines, 2 N.C. 278, and, in addition to the cases there cited, see Johnston v. Pasteur, 1 N.C. 582;Norfleet v. Harris, ibid., 517; Walker v. Mebane, 5 N.C. 41; Knight v.Leak, 19 N.C. 133; Revel v. Revel, 19 N.C. 272; Hardie v. Cotton,36 N.C. 61; Poindexter v. Blackburn, ibid., 286.

Cited: Weeks v. Weeks, 40 N.C. 120 (but under erroneous title ofBlount v. Haddock).

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Weeks v. . WeeksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1847
  2. Knight v. . LeakSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1836
  3. Johnston v. . PasteurSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1803
  4. Lewis v. . HynesSuperior Court of North Carolina · 1796
  5. Governor Ex Rel. Revel v. RevelSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1837

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API