Hyde v. . Tatham
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtAdaMS, J.
The plaintiff was the only witness. He testified that he had received the note from Tatham before its maturity and had endorsed and delivered it to Iiyatt; that Hyatt had returned it, and that the plaintiff was the owner and holder of the note at the time he brought suit.
Instead of being clear the testimony is rather confusing. A part of it seems to indicate that Tatham sold the lumber “for the money,” and thereby became indebted to the plaintiff; but other parts are inconsistent with this inference. The plaintiff alleges, however, that Tatham is indebted to him on the note, not in assumpsit…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Houser v. . FayssouxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- J. W. Perry Co. v. Taylor Bros.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
- First National Bank of Henderson v. JohnstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
- Horton v. . WilsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
3Cited by1 opinion
- Waddell v. Hood Ex Rel. Peoples Bank of BurnsvilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934