Howard v. Ross.

Superior Court of North Carolina

Howard v. Ross.

3 N.C. 333

DecidedJuly 5, 1804

StatusPublished

This text of 3 N.C. 333 (Howard v. Ross.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior 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

Howard v. Ross., 3 N.C. 333 (N.C. Ct. App. 1804).

Pincite

Opinions

Ross continued to be owner notwithstanding this contract, and is liable for the undertakings and miscarriages of Noble. The case in Molloy, 229, 230, is not law, so far as it states the master only to be liable for a deviation or barratry.

There was a verdict for the plaintiff, and a motion made for a new trial, and on the appointed day was fully argued; and now, on this day, being near the close of the term, the Court gave judgment.

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

Ross continued to be owner notwithstanding this contract, and is liable for the undertakings and miscarriages of Noble. The case in Molloy, 229, 230, is not law, so far as it states the master only to be liable for a deviation or barratry.

There was a verdict for the plaintiff, and a motion made for a new trial, and on the appointed day was fully argued; and now, on this day, being near the close of the term, the Court gave judgment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 N.C. 333, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/howard-v-ross-ncsuperct-1804.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack