From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Blount

Superior Court of North Carolina HILLSBORO —
Oct 1, 1791
2 N.C. 4 (N.C. Super. 1791)

Opinion

October Term, 1791

Whenever one person has the money of another, and knows what sum he ought to pay, he must pay interest for the same.

DEFENDANTS had received of the State at different times for the purpose of discharging the debt due from this State to the Government of Martinique, by commodities to be purchased and shipped, £ 1,300. Eleven hundred pounds they laid out accordingly, the rest they never applied; and the question now was, whether interest should be allowed. Mr. Moore urged it was to be considered in the nature of a loan, and insisted that in all cases where a man retains another's money, the amount whereof he knows, interest ought to be allowed, and cited 3 Wils., 205; 2 Re. Re., 761; 1 Burr., 151; 2 Bur., 1085; Doug., 724. (5)


Wherever the party knows what sum he ought to pay, there he ought to pay interest. Here they well knew how much of the money they had appropriated to the purposes they received it for, and for the balance they ought to pay interest; and it was allowed by the jury accordingly by way of damages.

This case may have been decided in April, 1792. The original note has no date to it.

Cited: Devereux v. Burgwyn, 33 N.C. 495; McRae v. Malloy, 87 N.C. 199.


Summaries of

State v. Blount

Superior Court of North Carolina HILLSBORO —
Oct 1, 1791
2 N.C. 4 (N.C. Super. 1791)
Case details for

State v. Blount

Case Details

Full title:STATE v. JOHN G. BLOUNT AND THOMAS BLOUNT

Court:Superior Court of North Carolina HILLSBORO —

Date published: Oct 1, 1791

Citations

2 N.C. 4 (N.C. Super. 1791)

Citing Cases

McRae v. Malloy

And it is a general rule established in this state, that whenever one person has the money of another and…