Harrington v. . Buchanan

29 S.E.2d 344, 224 N.C. 123
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMarch 22, 1944
StatusPublished

This text of 29 S.E.2d 344 (Harrington v. . Buchanan) 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
Harrington v. . Buchanan, 29 S.E.2d 344, 224 N.C. 123 (N.C. 1944).

Opinion

Civil action to restrain levy and sale under execution and to declare the validity of an assignment of judgment made by attorney of record under G.S., 1-240, formerly C. S., 618. See former appeal, 222 N.C. 698,24 S.E.2d 534.

Plaintiffs in their complaint allege in brief these facts:

1. That on 21 January, 1935, there was docketed in Lee County a judgment in favor of Miss Tannie S. Campbell, Executrix of W. W. Henley, deceased, and against J. L. Covington and his wife, Mrs. Madge Covington, J. C. Watson and A. B. Harrington, for the sum of $952 with interest thereon at 6% per annum from 18 April, 1932, and for costs $20.46, subject to these credits: $60.00 on 29 April, 1933, $25.00 on 20 November, 1933, $10.00 on ...... December, 1933, and $60.00 on ..... October, 1934; that though the judgment failed to distinguish the liability of defendants for the indebtedness therein, J. L. Covington and Mrs. Madge Covington were principals, and A. B. Harrington was only a surety; and that on the judgment a further credit of $300.00, derived from sale of property of said principals, should be made.

2. That on 4 April, 1936, A. B. Harrington, defendant in above judgment, and plaintiff in this action, "purchased the said judgment, and the said Miss Tannie S. Campbell, Executrix, acting by and through her duly authorized agent and attorney, H. M. Jackson, who was authorized to collect and compromise same, sold and transferred the same to Miss Eunice Harrington, Trustee, for A. B. Harrington's use and benefit; and on said date the said Executrix, acting by and through said agent, executed the following transfer thereof: `For value received and without recourse on me this judgment is assigned to Miss Eunice Harrington, Trustee. This April 4th, 1936. Tannie S. Campbell, Executrix W. W. *Page 124 Henley Estate, by H. M. Jackson, Attorney for Tannie Campbell, Executrix," entry of which was made upon the judgment record where the judgment was docketed, and witnessed by "W. G. Watson, C. S.C.," thereby becoming a record of the Superior Court of Lee County.

3. That at the time the judgment was assigned in the manner set forth in last preceding paragraph "the said Jackson caused plaintiff to execute a check in the sum of $501.00 on the National Bank of Sanford, N.C. payable to Tannie S. Campbell, Executrix, which was given and accepted in payment of said sum, in compromise of and for said transfer of said judgment"; "that said check so given was retained from April 4, 1936, to June 27, 1936, when someone caused" it "to be sent through the mails to A. B. Harrington, who immediately turned same over to W. G. Watson, C. S.C., who has had the same continuously in his possession since said date"; that about the same time an entry, in the handwriting of H. M. Jackson, was made in ink upon the judgment record, under the entry of the assignment aforesaid, in these words: "Check never accepted by Tannie Campbell therefore judgment never was paid by A. B. Harrington," and apparently in same kind of ink "lattice lines" were drawn across the original assignment, both of which "were null and void and of no effect in law for all purposes"; that said check was not returned to A. B. Harrington because it was not cash, but in an effort to repudiate the settlement which had theretofore been made; that the check was good for the amount thereof at all times until it was returned, and A. B. Harrington then tendered payment thereof in cash, and has at all times since been ready, able and willing to pay in cash the amount of the check either to the clerk, to the Executrix, to H. M. Jackson, agent and attorney, or to any other person designated by the court; and that in law and in equity plaintiffs are entitled to have the sum of $501.00 accepted, and the said transfer of 4 April, 1936, to Miss Eunice Harrington, Trustee, declared to be valid and binding.

4. That Miss Tannie S. Campbell is dead, and has been for several years, and on or about 26 February, 1941, W. H. Campbell qualified as administrator of Miss Tannie S. Campbell or as administrator d. b. n., c.t. a. of W. W. Henley, deceased, or both, and without authority of Miss Eunice Harrington, Trustee, or of A. B. Harrington, has caused an execution to be issued on said judgment, against A. B. Harrington, calling for payment of $705.15 principal with interest thereon from 26 February, 1935, and costs $23.46.

5. That during the lifetime of Miss Tannie S. Campbell the said W. H. Campbell, who was her brother and son-in-law of W. W. Henley, acted as her agent as Executrix under the will of W. W. Henley, deceased.

Defendants in answer filed 11 June, 1941, admit that judgment was entered, that Miss Tannie S. Campbell is dead, and that W. H. Campbell *Page 125 qualified as administrator, or as administrator d. b. n., c. t. a., and that he caused execution to issue, all as alleged in the complaint, and while admitting that W. H. Campbell advised with his said sister during her life, they deny that he was agent for her personally, or as executrix, and they further deny all other material allegations, averring "the true facts" to be "as hereinafter set out and not otherwise."

And "for a further answer, further defense, counterclaim and for affirmative relief," defendants in pertinent part aver in substance:

I. That defendant, W. H. Campbell, administrator d. b. n., c. t. a. of W. W. Henley, is the owner of and entitled to receive payment of the judgment of 21 January, 1935, that is, the judgment in question, subject to a credit of $298 as of March Term, 1935, of Superior Court of Lee County.

II. "3. (That on or about April 4, 1936, the said A. B. Harrington did offer to H. M. Jackson, attorney representing Miss Tannie S. Campbell, Executrix, the sum of $501.00 which amount represented the principal of said judgment then and now unpaid and excluded the interest on said judgment from April 18, 1932, subject to the credits hereinbefore set out, which the said H. M. Jackson agreed to take) on the following conditions, that he would submit the same to Miss Tannie S. Campbell, Executrix and plaintiff, and if it was satisfactory with her it would be with the said H. M. Jackson, and thereupon and on said condition the said A. B. Harrington issued his check in said sum and delivered the same to the said H. M. Jackson and at said time and with the same understanding the entry appearing on the judgment docket and set out in paragraph 2 of the complaint was made with the further understanding and agreement that if said offer was not satisfactory and was not accepted by Miss Campbell the same should be stricken out; that Miss Eunice Harrington, Trustee, was not present, had no consideration with the same and did not know of said entry and paid nothing for the same and no sum has ever been paid for said entry and purported transfer of said judgment used as a receipt as therein stated and the same was and is without consideration and void; that said H. M. Jackson explained at the time to the said Harrington that he was without authority to make said settlement unless the same was agreeable to the plaintiff, Tannie S. Campbell, and that it might be necessary for her to take the same up with the heirs at law, most of whom were of age and entitled to the larger part of said judgment; (that the said H. M. Jackson delivered said check of A. B. Harrington to Tannie S. Campbell, who immediately took the same up with the heirs at law of the said W. W.

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

Related

Harrington v. . Buchanan
24 S.E.2d 534 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1943)
Bank v. . Penland
173 S.E. 345 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1934)
Williams v. Philadelphia Life Insurance
193 S.E. 728 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1937)
Jones v. . Waldroup
7 S.E.2d 366 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)
Speas v. Merchants Bank & Trust Co.
125 S.E. 398 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1924)
Gardiner v. . May
89 S.E. 955 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1916)
Keen v. . Parker
8 S.E.2d 209 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)
Chavis v. . Brown
93 S.E. 471 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1917)
Chemical Co. v. . Bass
95 S.E. 766 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1918)
Barnes v. Peoples Bank & Trust Co.
139 S.E. 689 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1927)
Gardiner v. May
172 N.C. 192 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1916)
Southern Chemical Co. v. Bass
175 N.C. 426 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1918)
Bizzell v. Auto Tire & Equipment Co.
108 S.E. 439 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1921)
Jones v. Waldroup
217 N.C. 178 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
29 S.E.2d 344, 224 N.C. 123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harrington-v-buchanan-nc-1944.