Ellis v. . Hetfield

1 N.C. 71
Superior Court of North Carolina·Decided September 5, 1795·Published

Opinion

This was objected to by Slade, for the defendant: but And proof having given of the subscribing witness' handwriting:

WILLIAMS, J., required that the signature of the defendant should also be proved.

HAYWOOD, J., tacente.

It was accordingly done, and the plaintiff had a verdict.

NOTE. — See the note to Hamilton v. Williams, 2 N.C. 139, and the cases there referred to, and also the case of Saunders v. Ferrill,23 N.C. 97.

Cited: Ballard v. Ballard, 75 N.C. 192.

(72)

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

Ellis v. . Hetfield, 1 N.C. 71 (N.C. Ct. App. 1795).

1 N.C. 71 (Ellis v. . Hetfield) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ballard v. . Ballard
75 N.C. 190 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1876)
Hamilton v. . Williams
2 N.C. 139 (Superior Court of North Carolina, 1794)
Saunders v. . Ferrill
23 N.C. 97 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1840)