Coburn v. . Barnhill

141 S.E. 569, 195 N.C. 239, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 54
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided February 29, 1928·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Stacy, O. J.

The action of the trial court in holding that the credits, derived from dividends and sale of collateral, entered on the note in suit by the Martin County Savings and Trust Company, after the maker had denied liability and repudiated ownership of the stock' attached as collateral, did not repel the bar of the statute, must be upheld on authority of what was said in Nance v. Hulin, 192 N. C., 665, 135 S. E., 774, where the pertinent decisions are collated and distinguished, with special reference to Bank v. King, 164 N. C., 303, 80 S. E., 251, cited and relied upon by appellant. It would only be a matte? of repetition to state again what has been so recently said in this case.

No error.

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

Coburn v. . Barnhill, 141 S.E. 569, 195 N.C. 239, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 54 (N.C. 1928).

141 S.E. 569 (Coburn v. . Barnhill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Schiltz v. Wokal
121 P.2d 240 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1942)
Flowe v. . Hartwick
83 S.E. 841 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1914)