State ex rel. Hathaway v. Floyd

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State ex rel. Hathaway v. Floyd

33 N.C. 496

DecidedDecember 15, 1850

StatusPublished

This text of 33 N.C. 496 (State ex rel. Hathaway v. Floyd) 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

State ex rel. Hathaway v. Floyd, 33 N.C. 496 (N.C. 1850).

Pincite

Opinion

Pearson, J.

The failure to collect the debt is fully ae-counted for, by the facts stated in the case, and we con-; cur in the opinion that the defendants were not liable.

The delay in making sale was by the order of the plain, tiff, who directed the goods to be left in charge of Miss White ; and, after the debtor returned, he had a right to avail himself of the provisions of the Aet of the General Assembly, passed in 1844, ch. 32 — 118 Iredell’s Digested Manual. He was within the words of the statute, "a housekeeper,” and notwithstanding the levy, had a right to have the property "laid off and assigned” as the portion to which he was entitled under the provisions of the act-The “poor debtor” is in time, if he makes his application and procures the assignment to be made, at any time^be^ fore the property is changed and converted by a sale.

Pee Curiam. Judgment affirmed.

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

Pearson, J.

The failure to collect the debt is fully ae-counted for, by the facts stated in the case, and we con-; cur in the opinion that the defendants were not liable.

The delay in making sale was by the order of the plain, tiff, who directed the goods to be left in charge of Miss White ; and, after the debtor returned, he had a right to avail himself of the provisions of the Aet of the General Assembly, passed in 1844, ch. 32 — 118 Iredell’s Digested Manual. He was within the words of the statute, "a housekeeper,” and notwithstanding the levy, had a right to have the property "laid off and assigned” as the portion to which he was entitled under the provisions of the act-The “poor debtor” is in time, if he makes his application and procures the assignment to be made, at any time^be^ fore the property is changed and converted by a sale.

Pee Curiam. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 N.C. 496, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-hathaway-v-floyd-nc-1850.