Crossman v. . Hume

Court of King's Bench

Crossman v. . Hume

1 N.C. 802

DecidedJuly 5, 1793

StatusPublished

This text of 1 N.C. 802 (Crossman v. . Hume) 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

Crossman v. . Hume, 1 N.C. 802 (kingsbench 1793).

Pincite

Opinions

Rolls, e contra. When nothing is to the contrary in an appearance, it shall be understood to be well, and within the jurisdiction. Proctor andClifton's case, 10 Jac. In an action brought in Coventry, and venire facias in C. B., where it was de vicineto civitatis Ebor. D. P. 3 Car. Which case was held bad. I was of counsel in a case wherein it was awarded so. It cannot be well, except by intendment. The case of 8 H., is much in point. The visne ought to be of all the vills in the hundred.

Rolls insisted on Proctor and Clifton's case.

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

Rolls, e contra. When nothing is to the contrary in an appearance, it shall be understood to be well, and within the jurisdiction. Proctor andClifton's case, 10 Jac. In an action brought in Coventry, and venire facias in C. B., where it was de vicineto civitatis Ebor. D. P. 3 Car. Which case was held bad. I was of counsel in a case wherein it was awarded so. It cannot be well, except by intendment. The case of 8 H., is much in point. The visne ought to be of all the vills in the hundred.

Rolls insisted on Proctor and Clifton's case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 N.C. 802, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crossman-v-hume-kingsbench-1793.