Hamilton v. . Jones

Circuit Court of North Carolina

Hamilton v. . Jones

11 F. Cas. 345, 3 N.C. 291

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina·Decided December 5, 1803·Published

Opinion

*346 MARSHALL, Circuit Justice.

The seller impliedly gave power to the vendee to plead such pleas in his name as were necessary for the defense of the land; and should a plea he now put in by Arrington in the name of the vendor, I would not consent to strike it out.

Whereupon Arrington put in the plea of personal assets in the hands of the executor, enough to satisfy the judgment. And he put in the name of the vendor in open court

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

*346 MARSHALL, Circuit Justice.

The seller impliedly gave power to the vendee to plead such pleas in his name as were necessary for the defense of the land; and should a plea he now put in by Arrington in the name of the vendor, I would not consent to strike it out.

Whereupon Arrington put in the plea of personal assets in the hands of the executor, enough to satisfy the judgment. And he put in the name of the vendor in open court

Hamilton v. . Jones, 11 F. Cas. 345, 3 N.C. 291 (circtnc 1803).

Pincite

11 F. Cas. 345 (Hamilton v. . Jones) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.