Wynne v. . Latham

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Wynne v. . Latham

51 N.C. 329

DecidedJune 5, 1859

StatusPublished

This text of 51 N.C. 329 (Wynne v. . Latham) 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

Wynne v. . Latham, 51 N.C. 329 (N.C. 1859).

Pincite

Opinion

Ruffes, J.

The judgment must be affirmed. "Without enquiring whether Simmons, as hirer, or guardian, could, or could not convey the slaves, so as to vest the right in his alienee for the residue of the year, and upon the hypothesis that ho could not, still the Court is of opinion that the plaintiff cannot maintain assumpsit against the defendants for the hire during that period. That action will only lie on a contract, express or implied, and the contract here, is supposed to be one of the latter kind. But the law cannot imply a contract between these parties, when it is clear, from the facts stated, that the defendants derived their possession and title from another person, under whom they claimed the slaves adversely to the plaintiff and all the world. The point is the *331 the same as that decided in Lindsay v. McCulloch, at this term (ante 326); and supposing the plaintiff might have maintained trover or detinue, yet, he cannot maintain debt or as--sumpsit.

Pins CüRxaíe, Judgment affirmed.

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

Ruffes, J.

The judgment must be affirmed. "Without enquiring whether Simmons, as hirer, or guardian, could, or could not convey the slaves, so as to vest the right in his alienee for the residue of the year, and upon the hypothesis that ho could not, still the Court is of opinion that the plaintiff cannot maintain assumpsit against the defendants for the hire during that period. That action will only lie on a contract, express or implied, and the contract here, is supposed to be one of the latter kind. But the law cannot imply a contract between these parties, when it is clear, from the facts stated, that the defendants derived their possession and title from another person, under whom they claimed the slaves adversely to the plaintiff and all the world. The point is the *331 the same as that decided in Lindsay v. McCulloch, at this term (ante 326); and supposing the plaintiff might have maintained trover or detinue, yet, he cannot maintain debt or as--sumpsit.

Pins CüRxaíe, Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 N.C. 329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wynne-v-latham-nc-1859.