From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chairman v. Clark

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Dec 1, 1825
11 N.C. 43 (N.C. 1825)

Opinion

December Term, 1825.

The record of a recovery by the creditor of an intestate against his administrator is not evidence in a suit by the creditor against the securities of the administrator.

DEBT on an administration bond, tried below, before Nash, J., at MECKLENBURG; and on the trial it appeared that George Hampton had been appointed administrator of the estate of Thomas Henderson, and entered into bond with the defendants as his sureties. McBride, a creditor of Henderson, had sued Hampton and recovered judgment, which was unsatisfied, Hampton being insolvent; and in this suit McBride was permitted to offer as prima facie evidence the record of the recovery against Hampton. The admission of this testimony formed the ground of a motion for a new trial; and defendants contended, also, that this action would not lie against them.


This case presents the precise question that was made in McKellar v. Bowell, ante, 34. In that case the Superior Court rejected the evidence properly; in this case it was erroneously admitted. The judgment here must consequently be

Reversed.

Cited: Armistead v. Harramond, post, 341; Governor v. Carter, 25 N.C. 341; Brown v. Pike, 74 N.C. 534; Moore v. Alexander, 96 N.C. 36.

(44)


Summaries of

Chairman v. Clark

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Dec 1, 1825
11 N.C. 43 (N.C. 1825)
Case details for

Chairman v. Clark

Case Details

Full title:CHAIRMAN OF MECKLENBURG COUNTY COURT TO THE USE OF McBRIDE v. CLARK SPRINGS

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Dec 1, 1825

Citations

11 N.C. 43 (N.C. 1825)

Citing Cases

Brown v. Pike

Scales Scales, for appellants. The question is, whether the decree against the administrator in a cause in…

Lewis v. Fort

In S. v. Fullenwider, 26 N.C. 364, it was held that the receipt of a constable for a claim to collect was not…