Hunter v. M'Auslan
This text of 3 N.C. 366 (Hunter v. M'Auslan) 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.
Opinion
after hearing several atgmneutc. Had colleen for the bankruptcy, he would not be a good w.lmcss; because by defeating Hunter, he prevented a suit agai isi himself, and retained in his hands what M‘Auslan paid him s rod because: M‘Ausian being originally liable either to Gibbs or Hume-, mint remain so to Gibbs if Hunter fidls in chía action ; for then no other person can claim but Gibbs. But Gibb.; having obtained his certificate, and ail bis estate having been exhausted in paying the debts due from the United States, a --J there b'k'.g no t'und io the bauds of the assignees to be diminished by ?.TAus-laa’s suit against them ; it seems to me, there should be a new trial; that this part of the case may be belter considered, and [368]*368that it may be so carefully determined, as to give satisfaction to. the parties concerned.
A new trial ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 N.C. 366, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hunter-v-mauslan-ncsuperct-1805.