Wilkins v. M'Kenzie
Opinion
decided that MAkeiuai»; vras liable $ but at foe Co>:.. 1 of Goiiit.yi-cce, having reflecied on tbi* subjert ead look» 4 kw the bCc.jricífcií, Le changed use opinfoi;, and foe ofoc-y judder venía?!, y v/rfo him, they grrritrü a new fofo VLey tt-Ji this was s purchase ol the bul hy Wilkins, end tho dfow.y ffo » 'v'ili by M'-Eensie for a precedent debt, aau bciug a piirdhis. Mfovw l:oí coacerasdivibe eveas. The cess relied s-r vas [278] Esp. Term. Reports, 105, Fulton vs. Reinhard. The cases cited for the plaintiff, were 7 T. 64: For the defendant, 12 Moc. 203—Salk. 124—12 Mod. 408, 517—2 L. R. 930—Andrew's, Rep. 187, 188—2 Salk. 442—3 Salk. 118—12 Mod. 521—6 Mod. 36.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
3 N.C. 277 (Wilkins v. M'Kenzie) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.