Wilkins v. M'Kenzie
This text of 3 N.C. 277 (Wilkins v. M'Kenzie) 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.
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]*278Esp. 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 N.C. 277, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilkins-v-mkenzie-ncsuperct-1803.