Legal Opinion

Hunt v. . Eure

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 10, 1924PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.

In Campbell v. McCormac, 90 N. C., 491, it is said: “At the common law, promissory notes were not negotiable, but were made so by the statute of 3 and 4 Anne, ch. 9, which was reenacted in this State by the act of 1762, and that act was amended by the act of 1786, which declared them to be negotiable, whether expressed to be payable to order or for value received. Rev. Stat., ch. 13, secs. 1, 2; Rev. Code, ch. 13, sec. 1; The Code, see. 41. All such notes thus made negotiable import prima facie that' they are founded upon a valuable consideration; and while such consideration is essential to…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. White Ex Rel. White v. HinesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  2. Alexander v. . JohnstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  3. Piner v. . BrittainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  4. Johnson v. . LassiterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
  5. Jones v. . WinsteadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Young v. . Whitehall Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  2. Ross Realty Co. v. First Citizens Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  3. In Re the Appeal of MartinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  4. Vance v. . GuySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
  5. Lightner v. LightnerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1962

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API