Earp v. . Richardson
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Civil ActioN, tried at Fall Term, 1877, of WilsoN Superior Court, before JSure, J. The plaintiffs brought this action to recover, an amount, alleged-to be due on account of a" certain note executed by-Henderson Hocutt.
Read the full summary
Civil ActioN, tried at Fall Term, 1877, of WilsoN Superior Court, before JSure, J. The plaintiffs brought this action to recover, an amount, alleged-to be due on account of a" certain note executed by-Henderson Hocutt. The Referee to whom the case was referred found the following facts:— 1. Henderson Hocutt executed a deed of trust to the defendant, J. M. Taylor, on the 9th of January, 1867, conveying real and personal property to be sold to pay his debts. 2. The trustee'sold the property and paid all the debts mentioned in the deed, except the notewhich is the subject, of this controversy.…
1Opinion of the CourtReade, J.
The claim of the defendant, Richardson, to -realize nearly one thousand dollars for a one hundred and twenty-five dollar horse, provokes scrutiny, to say the least. One William Earp held a note on one Hocutt for $500. William Earp died, and said note came into the hands of his son John, plaintiff, as a legacy. The plaintiff, John, ■ delivered the note to his son Taylor Earp with instructions to go to Hocutt, the maker of the note, and buy a mule, and ■enter the price of the mule upon the note as a credit. The principal and interest of the note were then about $860.
The legal effect of that…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Earp v. . RichardsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879