Holderby v. Blum
Supreme Court of North Carolina
The case upon the pleadings was as follows. — The plaintiff purchased of A. D. Murphy a tract of land, and executed four bonds, to secure the purchase money, payable at different times. Subsequently the plaintiff became embarrassed, and Murphy agreed to receive a re-conveyance of the land, and to surrender the bonds.
Read the full summary
The case upon the pleadings was as follows. — The plaintiff purchased of A. D. Murphy a tract of land, and executed four bonds, to secure the purchase money, payable at different times. Subsequently the plaintiff became embarrassed, and Murphy agreed to receive a re-conveyance of the land, and to surrender the bonds. This agreement was executed by the plaintiff, but Murphy on several pretences evaded the execution of his part of it, and assigned them before they became due to the defendant, the agent of the Bank of Cape Fear at Salem, as collateral security for a judgment, obtained against…
1Opinion of the Court
Daniel, Judge,
after stating the facts, proceeded as follows-: The plaintiff, as to Murphy, had an undoubted equity to have the bonds surrendered and cancelled. What is there in the case that puts the defendant in a better situation than his assignor ? The defendant says that he was only agent of the Bank in this transaction. But we think the facts ad mitted, in law, make him also the agenQof Murphy. But ^et us Put ^ie case *n ^ stl’ongest light against the plaintiff. Suppose the assignment of the bonds had been to the bank directly; still, if the bank had given no new credit, money or other…
2Cited by2 opinions
- American National Bank v. DewSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
- Brooks v. Sullivan.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1901