Sluder v. . Wilson
This text of 32 N.C. 92 (Sluder v. . Wilson) 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.
Opinion
The words are clearly not actionable in themselves, as they do not import a charge of perjury. To make them amount to such a charge, it is necessary the declaration should state, and the proof shew, a proceeding, in which an oath could be judicially administered, so as to constitute false swearing therein a perjury. Brown v. Dula, 3 Murp. 574. To bring this case within the rule, the counsel for the plaintiff referred to the act concerning Strays, Rev. Stat. Ch. 112, by the 4th section of which, the owner of a beast, which has been taken lip and entered as an estray, may, within twelve months after the appraisement, prove his property before the ranger on his own oath, so as to entitle him to recover the beast from the person, who took it up. But that does not help the plaintiff, as he gave no evidence, that the cow was an estray or had been taken up as such ; so that it did not at all appear, that the affidavit was given for the purpose, or in a proceeding of the kind, provided for in the Act. As far as appears, the oath was not at all required nor authorized by the law, but was merely voluntary ; and, therefore, in taking it, the plaintiff could not be guilty of perjury, and, consequently, in saying that the oath was false, the defendant did not impute to the plaintiff’ the crime of perjury.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
32 N.C. 92, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sluder-v-wilson-nc-1849.