Brightman's Case

1 N.C. 738
CourtCourt of King's Bench
DecidedJuly 5, 1793
StatusPublished

This text of 1 N.C. 738 (Brightman's Case) 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
Brightman's Case, 1 N.C. 738 (kingsbench 1793).

Opinion

He shall not be relieved here. It was his own folly to deliver the writing to a person who took so little care of it. Perhaps there was some condition or limitation in the deed on which the annuity ended, and he now pretends to have lost the deed, in order to charge his brother absolutely. But if the deed had been casually lost, as by fire, etc., he might have relief in equity, as in the case *of Vincent and Beverly.

And it was referred to Justice Hutton. In this case it was held by DODERIDGE, J., et non fuit negatum, that where the lessor enters on the lessee and suspends the rent, he shall not have relief in equity, for it is against law. Poph., 205, 206; Noy, 82; 3 Bulstr., 315; 1 Roll., 378; Barryv. Stile, antea, p. 648. *Page 739

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 N.C. 738, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brightmans-case-kingsbench-1793.