Den on Demise of Moore v. M'Duffy
This text of 10 N.C. 578 (Den on Demise of Moore v. M'Duffy) 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.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the Court
The trusts declared in the deed to the plaintiff are, that he shall pay all the creditors of Redjield and Whiting who shall sign the deed by the first of August 1817; and there are certain covenants in the deed binding those creditors to divers acts, as soon as they have executed the same. Admitting that a trust may be created for the benefit of creditors, by a deed, of the existence of which they are ignorant, and that their assent to it may be presumed, yet this case is subject to a very different construction; *580 for the trust is created expressly on the condition that they shall execute the deed by a certain day, and then certain obligations are imposed upon them; which surely they never can incur, without a performance of the condition. Now it does not judicially appear that the creditors ever executed the deed, and of course William Moore did not become a trustee for them. There are signatures and seals to the deed, but whose they are we have, no means of ascertaining.
It results from this view of the case, that the trust, if it ever arose, existed only for the benefit of the bargain-ors, and that the property in the hands of the trustee was liable to their creditors, as they could entitle themselves by legal process; it being such property as is made liable to execution by the act of 1812, eh. 830. There must be a new trial.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
10 N.C. 578, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/den-on-demise-of-moore-v-mduffy-nc-1825.