Legal Opinion

Moose v. . Crowell

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 6, 1908PublishedCited by 1 opinion

ActioN tried before Moore, J., and a jury, at January Term, 1908, of Cabaeiots. Plaintiff appealed.

1Opinion of the CourtClake, C. J.

Action on a bond alleged to have been executed by defendant’s intestate. Slie could not write. Non est factum was pleaded. There was evidence by several wit-nessés that she said that the note was hers, that she said her son, Henry, wrote the note for her, and that she had been seen to make payments on it and direct credits therefor to be entered on the bond.

The only defense relied on is that, this being a bond, there was not sufficient evidence to go to the jury to prove that it was “signed, sealed and delivered” by the obligor or by her authority. Wester v. Bailey, 118 N. C., 193, held that…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. McKee v. . HicksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1830
  2. Wester v. . BaileySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
  3. Kime v. . BrooksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1848

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Cowen v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929

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

Powered by the Exa API