Sprinkle and Wife v. . Martin

72 N.C. 92
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided January 5, 1875·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Rea.de, J.

This is the fifth case at least, in our own Reports, in which it is decided : 1. That a debtor owing two or more debts to the same creditor, and making a payment, may at the time direct the application of it.

2. If the debtor does not direct the application at the time, the creditor may make it.

3. If neither debtor or creditor makes it, then the law will apply it to that debt for which the creditor’s security is most precarions. Moss v. Adams, 4 Ired. Eq., 42; Ramseur v. Thomas, 10 Ired., 165; State v. Thomas, 11 Ired., 251; Jenkins v. Beal, 70 N. C. Rep., 440.

There is no error.

Peb CuRIak. Judgment affirmed.

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

Sprinkle and Wife v. . Martin, 72 N.C. 92 (N.C. 1875).

72 N.C. 92 (Sprinkle and Wife v. . Martin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

French v. . Richardson
83 S.E. 31 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1914)
Stone v. . Rich
75 S.E. 1077 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1912)
Stone Co. v. Rich
75 S.E. 1077 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1912)
Lee v. . Manley
70 S.E. 385 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1911)
Young v. . Alford
23 S.E. 973 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1896)
Lester v. . Houston
8 S.E. 366 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1888)
Long v. . Miller
93 N.C. 233 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1885)
Wittkowski v. . Reid
84 N.C. 21 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1881)