Chairman of Washington County Court Ex Rel. Armistead v. Harramond
Supreme Court of North Carolina
From Washington. William.B. Harramond, the Defendant, had been appointed by Washington County Court, administrator upon the estate of Benjamin Fessenden, and the other Defendants were Potter, one of his securities in the administration bond, and Flower and Fagan, administrators of Webb, the other security.
Read the full summary
From Washington. William.B. Harramond, the Defendant, had been appointed by Washington County Court, administrator upon the estate of Benjamin Fessenden, and the other Defendants were Potter, one of his securities in the administration bond, and Flower and Fagan, administrators of Webb, the other security. This action W’as brought upon the bond, and upon the trial before Nash Judge, the veal Plaintiff, after proving the bond, gave in evidence the record of a judgment oh-tained by him against Fessenden in his life-time, which was objected to, but received by the Court. He further produced the…
1Opinion of the Court
HaIiT>, Judge. —
The judgment obtained against the Defendant’s intestate, (Harramond) as well as that obtained against Harramond himself as administrator, is evidence of a debt due from his intestate, and he is bound by sucli evidence. The securities of Harramond, the other Defendant, are not concerned in interest, whether such debt is due or not; because if the assets are not liable to creditors, they are subject to (lie claims of legatees 5 and tiie administrator Harramond, is as much bound for their faithful administration in the one case, as in the other, and it is only for the faithful…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Charleston & Western Carolina Railway Co. v. Robert G. Lassiter & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
- Miller v. . PittsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
- Lewis v. . FortSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1876
- State v. . FullenwiderSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1844