Brown v. . Long
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This case came originally before this Court upon demurrer, which was overruled. See 2 Dev. &r- Bat. Eg. 138. Th« cause was then remanded, and the defendants, Long, Hardie and Hargrove answered, and the other defendants let the bill be taken pro confesso against them, and set for hearing ex parte.
Read the full summary
This case came originally before this Court upon demurrer, which was overruled. See 2 Dev. &r- Bat. Eg. 138. Th« cause was then remanded, and the defendants, Long, Hardie and Hargrove answered, and the other defendants let the bill be taken pro confesso against them, and set for hearing ex parte. Having been set for hearing in Rowan Court of Equity upon the bill, answers, judgment pro confesso, exhibits and interlocutory order, the case was, at the Fall Term, 1840, transmitted to this Court for a determination. The only ground upon which the. defendant now resisted the plaintiff’s recovery…
1Opinion of the Court
Ruffin, Chief Justice.
It appears, upon the pleadings, that the plaintiff, Brown, gave to the plaintiff, Campbell, his bond with surety for the amount of the debt of Long, one of the defendants, to Campbell, for which Brown was Long’s surety; and that thereupon Campbell assigned the judgment at law to the plaintiff Cowan, in trust for Brown. It is admitted, by the defendants who have answered, that Josiah Huie and Robert Huie were respectively indebted to Long by bonds in the sums mentioned in the bill, and that he, Long, endorsed the bonds to the defendants, Hardie and Hargrove, in trust for…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Clifton v. OwensSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
- Bunker v. . LlewellynSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Clifton v. . OwensSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
- Friedling v. FreedmanCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1915
- Rambaut v. . MayfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1820