Argot v. . Cheney

Court of King's Bench

Argot v. . Cheney

1 N.C. 689

DecidedJuly 5, 1793

StatusPublished

This text of 1 N.C. 689 (Argot v. . Cheney) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of King's Bench primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Argot v. . Cheney, 1 N.C. 689 (kingsbench 1793).

Pincite

Opinion

Father tenant for life, remainder to the son in tail; praecipe brought against the father, who vouched the son, and common recovery had; the indenture reciting that the recovery was made between the father and others. But as no proof was made of the consent of the son, and he was not a party to the indenture, the court directed the jury to find the uses according to the estate that he had at the time of the recovery. It was said that if two joint tenants suffer a recovery, and one declares, the uses of the whole, it will only be well for the one-half, unless the consent of the other be proved. Antea, p. 682; Palm., 402, 405; Noy, 77.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Father tenant for life, remainder to the son in tail; praecipe brought against the father, who vouched the son, and common recovery had; the indenture reciting that the recovery was made between the father and others. But as no proof was made of the consent of the son, and he was not a party to the indenture, the court directed the jury to find the uses according to the estate that he had at the time of the recovery. It was said that if two joint tenants suffer a recovery, and one declares, the uses of the whole, it will only be well for the one-half, unless the consent of the other be proved. Antea, p. 682; Palm., 402, 405; Noy, 77.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 N.C. 689, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/argot-v-cheney-kingsbench-1793.