Rose v. . Coble
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Trover, tried at a Special Terra of the Superior Court of Guilford, held upon the second Monday in December 1867, before Warren, J. The plaintiff claimed a special property in the mare in question, under a pledge by one Garner his brother-in-law, dated 13th October 1866, made to secure him as his creditor and also as his surety.
Read the full summary
Trover, tried at a Special Terra of the Superior Court of Guilford, held upon the second Monday in December 1867, before Warren, J. The plaintiff claimed a special property in the mare in question, under a pledge by one Garner his brother-in-law, dated 13th October 1866, made to secure him as his creditor and also as his surety. She had been delivered to the plaintiff, and was in his possession when taken by the defendants, who were constables having claims in their hands against Garner. It was shown that after the plaintiff had taken possession of the mare, Garner again had her in his…
1Opinion of the Court
Reads J.
The defendant’s first objection is, “that the transaction was fraudulent.” Whether there was fraud or not was a question of fact for the jury, under proper instructions from the court. That part of the charge which was excepted t,o is, “that any fraudulent purpose on the part of the pledgor, to which the pledgee was not a party, did not affect the pledge.” We see no error in this. To render a contract void for fraud, the fraud must affect the contract. A contract is not the purpose of one but the agreement of ttoo minds.
The defendant’s second exception cannot be sustained. It-is true…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Island Pond National Bank v. LacroixSupreme Court of Vermont · 1932
- Bundy v. . Credit Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
- Bundy v. Commercial Credit Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
- Fletcher American National Bank v. McDermidIndiana Court of Appeals · 1920
- Sneeden v. . Nurnberger's MarketSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.