Deep River Copper Co. v. Martin

70 N.C. 300
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJanuary 15, 1874
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 70 N.C. 300 (Deep River Copper Co. v. Martin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Deep River Copper Co. v. Martin, 70 N.C. 300 (N.C. 1874).

Opinion

Bykum, J.

The case states that the plaintiff was as well known by one name as the other, but it is found as facts, that he had no notice of action against him, and that the claim on which the judgment was taken, wasfraudulent. And although it may be true that the party sued, was as well known by one name as the other, it is a strong circumstance against the defendant, that the note on which he sued out his attachment, was given by the agent of the company, a brother of the defendant, who necessarily, must have known the true name of his principal. The company should have an opportunity of contesting the claim.

There is no error.

PER CuRiAM. Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

State Mortgage Corporation v. Traylor
36 S.W.2d 440 (Texas Supreme Court, 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
70 N.C. 300, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deep-river-copper-co-v-martin-nc-1874.