Pearson v. . Nesbit
Supreme Court of North Carolina
From Rowan. Richmond Pearson appointed the present Plaintiff, and Jesse A Pearjson, executor and executrix of his will. At the time of his death, h* was indebted to Alexander Nes-hil & Company, which consisted of the present Defend-am, and the same Jesse A. Pearson, whom he had appointed one of his executors.
Read the full summary
From Rowan. Richmond Pearson appointed the present Plaintiff, and Jesse A Pearjson, executor and executrix of his will. At the time of his death, h* was indebted to Alexander Nes-hil & Company, which consisted of the present Defend-am, and the same Jesse A. Pearson, whom he had appointed one of his executors. A writ issued in the name of “ A. Nesbit & Co.” Plaintiffs, against Jesse A. Pearson and Elizabeth Pearson, executor arid executrix of Richmond Pearson,” De-feudants, returnable to !he Fail term of 1820, of Rowan S«poeior Court, "hen judgment was confessed thereon by the Defendants.…
1Opinion of the Court
Henderson Judge.
A suit at law, is a contest between two parties in a Court of Justise ; the one seeking, and ibeothei withholding the tiling in contest. The, same individual cannot be, at the same time, botli the person seeking and tbe person withholding. For it involves an absurdity, that a person should seek/rom him self, or withhold from himself. Between a corporation and the individuals composing it, this identity does not exist, and the absurdity >bove stated is avoided ; but where, the same person is both Plaintiff and. Defendant, in different rights, as for himself on the one side, and…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Monmouth Inv. Co. v. MeansCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1906
- Employers Mutual Casualty Co. v. GriffinCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
- Slocumb v. . AndersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1814
- In Re Estate of William C. LinkCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2017
- Provins v. Provins, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Fayette County1947
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.