Henderson v. . Stuart

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Henderson v. . Stuart

18 S.E.2d 705, 221 N.C. 37, 1942 N.C. LEXIS 385

Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided February 25, 1942·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

A careful perusal of the record and exceptions filed in this case do not show any reversible error. The obligation of the plaintiffs was joint and several and the coplaintiff, Jonah Henderson, had the right, with the consent and approval of the owner and holder of the secured notes, to divert a portion of the proceeds received from the fire insurance company to the payment of other indebtedness. Turlington v. Lucas, 186 N. C., 283, 119 S. E., 366; Winchester-Simmons Co. v. Cutler, 194 N. C., 698, 140 S. E., 622.

In the judgment of the court below we find

No error.

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

Per Curiam.

A careful perusal of the record and exceptions filed in this case do not show any reversible error. The obligation of the plaintiffs was joint and several and the coplaintiff, Jonah Henderson, had the right, with the consent and approval of the owner and holder of the secured notes, to divert a portion of the proceeds received from the fire insurance company to the payment of other indebtedness. Turlington v. Lucas, 186 N. C., 283, 119 S. E., 366; Winchester-Simmons Co. v. Cutler, 194 N. C., 698, 140 S. E., 622.

In the judgment of the court below we find

No error.

Henderson v. . Stuart, 18 S.E.2d 705, 221 N.C. 37, 1942 N.C. LEXIS 385 (N.C. 1942).

Pincite

18 S.E.2d 705 (Henderson v. . Stuart) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related