McKee v. . Hicks

Supreme Court of North Carolina

McKee v. . Hicks

13 N.C. 379

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedJune 5, 1830

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 13 N.C. 379 (McKee v. . Hicks) 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

McKee v. . Hicks, 13 N.C. 379 (N.C. 1830).

Pincite

Opinion

Hall, Judge.

The opinion of the Judge of the. Superior Court, on the question raised in this case, is so full and so correct, that with all the deliberation with which it is our duty to examine it, nothing can be added. We therefore think the rule for a new trial should be discharged. Whatever injustice may be done to the Plaintiff in this rase, is attributable to his own oversight in taking a security for his debt, which the law cannot recognise as a legal one. If an instrument with a seal to it is not completely executed by signing, sealing and delivering, it cannot heroine more so by any art of an unauthorized agent. It would be dangerous if the law were otherwise. Suppose the son of Mr. Campbell, or any other unauthorized agent had filled up the bond with ten times the sum actually borrowed ; it would be thought a great hardship upon the obligors. And so it would he^ if they were compelled to pay it.

Per Curiam. — Let the judgment of the Court below be affirmed,

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

Hall, Judge.

The opinion of the Judge of the. Superior Court, on the question raised in this case, is so full and so correct, that with all the deliberation with which it is our duty to examine it, nothing can be added. We therefore think the rule for a new trial should be discharged. Whatever injustice may be done to the Plaintiff in this rase, is attributable to his own oversight in taking a security for his debt, which the law cannot recognise as a legal one. If an instrument with a seal to it is not completely executed by signing, sealing and delivering, it cannot heroine more so by any art of an unauthorized agent. It would be dangerous if the law were otherwise. Suppose the son of Mr. Campbell, or any other unauthorized agent had filled up the bond with ten times the sum actually borrowed ; it would be thought a great hardship upon the obligors. And so it would he^ if they were compelled to pay it.

Per Curiam. — Let the judgment of the Court below be affirmed,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 N.C. 379, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mckee-v-hicks-nc-1830.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack