Tindall's Executors v. Johnston

Superior Court of North Carolina

Tindall's Executors v. Johnston

2 N.C. 428

DecidedSeptember 15, 1796

StatusPublished

This text of 2 N.C. 428 (Tindall's Executors v. Johnston) 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.

Bluebook

Tindall's Executors v. Johnston, 2 N.C. 428 (N.C. Ct. App. 1796).

Pincite

Opinion

Per curiam

Where the contract is such that it may. he discharged in specific articles, it is not negotiable under the act of 1786, c. 4. whicti makes such bonds negotiable as are for money only. It has been argued, that the bond being foi money, to he discharged by the delivery of tobacco at a certain day, and the tobacco Ining not then delivered, it thereby became a money bond only; the condition annexed, of its being dischargeable in tobacco, being for the benefit of the obligor. This is true, but then at the making of the bond, and until the day of payment, it was not negotiable ; arid when an instrument is not negotiable at the time of its creation, no ex post facto circumstance can make it otherwise — the obligor having not originally contracted to be liable to an assignment and ns consequences. The Plaintiff was nonsuited.

Note. —Vide Jamieson v. Farr, ante 182.

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

Per curiam

Where the contract is such that it may. he discharged in specific articles, it is not negotiable under the act of 1786, c. 4. whicti makes such bonds negotiable as are for money only. It has been argued, that the bond being foi money, to he discharged by the delivery of tobacco at a certain day, and the tobacco Ining not then delivered, it thereby became a money bond only; the condition annexed, of its being dischargeable in tobacco, being for the benefit of the obligor. This is true, but then at the making of the bond, and until the day of payment, it was not negotiable ; arid when an instrument is not negotiable at the time of its creation, no ex post facto circumstance can make it otherwise — the obligor having not originally contracted to be liable to an assignment and ns consequences. The Plaintiff was nonsuited.

Note. —Vide Jamieson v. Farr, ante 182.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 N.C. 428, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tindalls-executors-v-johnston-ncsuperct-1796.