Rhodes v. . Holmes
Supreme Court of North Carolina
From Robeson. This was an action of covenant. The Defendant’s ientaior, in his life-time, had sold and delivered to the Plaintiff, certain negroes, and in the bill of sale for said negroes he covenanted ia the following words, viz. “ And íf Í hereby promise for myself, my heirs, executors, and “ administrators, to warrant and defend the said negroes Ji as before named, unto the said Rhodes, his heirs and u assigns forever, against the claim of all persons what- “ soever.”
Read the full summary
From Robeson. This was an action of covenant. The Defendant’s ientaior, in his life-time, had sold and delivered to the Plaintiff, certain negroes, and in the bill of sale for said negroes he covenanted ia the following words, viz. “ And íf Í hereby promise for myself, my heirs, executors, and “ administrators, to warrant and defend the said negroes Ji as before named, unto the said Rhodes, his heirs and u assigns forever, against the claim of all persons what- “ soever.” The bill of sale was duly proven by the oath of the subscribing witness, and ordered to be registered 30th October, 1798 ;…
1Opinion of the Court
The defendant below objected to the introduction of this bill of sale in evidence, because it appeared from the certificate of Wm. Regan that he was only an assistant, and he signed his name as such, and because the certificate of Neill Buie, the register, was without a date, and therefore that the bill of sale had never been duly registered. This objection was sustained by the court and the evidence rejected. The plaintiff then offered to prove the execution of the bill of sale by introducing testimony of the handwriting of the subscribing witness, who was dead, which also was refused him by…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Knight v. . ThomasSuperior Court of North Carolina · 1796