Wrenford v. . Gordon

1 N.C. 2
CourtSuperior Court of North Carolina
DecidedNovember 5, 1778
StatusPublished

This text of 1 N.C. 2 (Wrenford v. . Gordon) 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
Wrenford v. . Gordon, 1 N.C. 2 (N.C. Ct. App. 1778).

Opinion

It appeared by affidavits filed, that the defendant and her late husband had been in quiet possession of the slave, who had been taken in pursuance of this writ, for several years. And that it was merely in order to try the right of the parties to him that the writ had been sued out. The taking out of this writ for this purpose is irregular, wrongful, and oppressive. Let it be quashed.

Nash afterwards moved for and obtained a writ de returno habendo. Upon which the slave was restored to the defendant, ut audivi.

NOTE. — Replevin cannot be supported unless a taking is proved.Cummings v. MacGill, 4 N.C. 535; S. c., 6 N.C. 357. See the Act of 1828 (1 Rev. Stat., ch. 101), which provides for bringing the action of replevin for slaves in certain cases.

(3)

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

Related

Cummings v. . MacGill
4 N.C. 535 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1817)
Cummings v. MacGill.
6 N.C. 357 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1818)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 N.C. 2, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wrenford-v-gordon-ncsuperct-1778.