Page images


1. It is essential to a recognisance for the appearance of
the conusor to answer to charges against him, that it show
the cause of taking it. Nicholson vs. The State

2. A recognisance must stand or fall by itself; and if not
good on its face by failing to specify the offence for which
the accused is arrested and bound to appear and an-
swer, parol evidence is inadmissible to supply the de-
fect. Ib.




1. A remainder in slaves, to take effect and be enjoyed
after a life estate, cannot be created by parol in favour
of persons not in being at the time the property is de-
livered to the tenant for life. Kirkpatrick, Guardian vs.



1. In case of express contract to pay rent, the destruction
of the premises by fire, or violence, or any casualty
whatever, is not a good defence to an action to recover
the rent, unless there is also an express stipulation to
that effect. Nor will a court of equity relieve against
such contracts, under such circumstances. White and
others vs. Molyneux


1. The rule in Shelly's case applies only where the estate
to the ancestor and to the heirs is of the same kind; it
applies to legal estates and to trusts executed, but not to
trusts executory, when it is the intention of the testator
that it shall not apply. It applies to personal as well as
real property. Edmondson and wife vs. Dyson -


1. Sheriff's fees on sales under execution. See title "Fees
of Sheriff." Aycock vs. Buffington, guardian





1. Additional security of the administrator of an appellant.
who dies pending the appeal where the original security,
good at first, becomes insolvent pending the appeal, is
not required. Latimer, Whiting & Co. vs. The Admrs.
of Ware

2. Securities on appeal, and securities to injunction bonds,
being bound for the eventual condemnation money in
the cause, under the provisions of the statutes of this
State, are necessary parties to a writ of error to the Su-
preme Court, to reverse the judgment of the Court be-
low. Coffee and others vs. Newsom, Exr. &c.


1. Where the old sheriff fails to deliver to his successor an
execution placed in his hands during his term of office,
and receives money thereon fourteen days after the ap-
pointment and qualification of the new sheriff, his se-
curities are not liable in an action on the bond, to ac-
count to the defendant for said money, notwithstanding
he has been compelled to pay it a second time to the
plaintiff. McDonald, Governor, &c. vs. Bradshaw


1. The maker of a promissory note in an action by the in-
dorsee who received it after due, cannot set-off a demand
against the payee, unless such demand is connected
with, or grew out of the original transaction for which
the note was given, or attaches to the note itself; he
cannot set-off a demand arising out of collateral matters.
Tinsley vs. Beall



[ocr errors]



2. To authorise a defendant to set-off a demand, under the
24th section of the judiciary act of 1799, such demand
must be against the plaintiff in the action. Ib.


3. One judgment may be set-off against another; although
all the parties to the different records are not the same.
Colquitt vs. Bonner



1. A rule against a sheriff to pay over money is not suffi-
ciently certain, unless it state the court in which the judg-
ment and execution claiming the money was had. Be-
thune vs. Bonner

2. A sheriff, for the performance of his legal duty, is only
entitled to such compensation therefor as the law pre-
scribes. Hicks vs. Moore and others

3. Where a sheriff levied on slaves by virtue of an attach-
ment, and while in his possession worked and hired
them out for his own use and benefit, and a verdict of the
jury having been returned on an issue directed by the
court finding that the labour of the slaves was worth
the per diem allowance authorized by law for keeping
them; held that the sheriff was bound to account for the
same, on a rule against him to pay over the money in
his hands arising from the sale of the property at the
instance of the creditors. lb. -

4. Sheriff's fees on sales under execution. See title "Fees
of Sheriff" Aycock vs. Buffington, Guardian


[ocr errors]




[ocr errors]


1. A sheriff may sell under execution, the undivided inter-
est of the defendant in negroes and other personal prop-
erty, and the purchaser at such sale becomes a tenant
in common with the other co-tenants; and until there is
a severance, or destruction of the tenancy in common,
one or more of the co-tenants cannot maintain trover or
trespass against the others. Leonard vs. Scarborough
and wife, et al.



1. To charge a person with having gonorrhea is actionable,
as it will have the effect to exclude him either wholly or
partially from society; certainly from all good society.
Watson vs. McCarthy -



1. A Solicitor General out of office, having obtained orders
for the payment of costs under the 4th section of the
14th division of the penal code, is entitled to be paid out
of money brought into court by his successor, in prefer-
ence to similar orders of junior date obtained by such
successor. Hackett vs. Jones

[ocr errors]


1. When declaration is bad upon special demurrer, but
amendable. See title "Amendment." Murphy vs. Law-



1. The omission of the word "grant" in one section of a
statute may be explained by other parts of the same
statute, so as to supply the omitted word and give the
act its intended effect. Brinsfield vs. Carter


1. The regulations in the 11th and 21st sections, and the
limitation as to amount in the 25th section of the origi-
nal charter of the Central Bank, are directory merely to
the officers of the institution. And a debt may be col-
lected, although contracted in disregard of any or all of
these provisions, that is being without security or indors-
er, having run more than twelve months, and exceeding
the sum of $2,500. Bond vs. The Central Bank

2. Construction of Central Bank charter, and amendments.
The Acts of 1829 and 1838, amendatory of the original
charter of the Central Bank, clothe it with additional -
authority, and the courts are bound to observe their pro-
visions without their having been pleaded. See title
"Pleading." Bond vs. The Central Bank





107, 115

3. A debt contracted with the Central Bank under the
amended charter of 1829, or under the Act of 1838, will

be presumed to have been done in good faith, in the ab-
sence of any fact or circumstance implicating the trans-"
action. Ib.

107, 115


1. When there is not such a surprise as will entitle a party
to a continuance after the cause has been submitted to a
jury on the appeal. See title "Continuance." McCutch-
in vs. Bankston -


1. The undivided interest of a defendant in property held
by himself and others as tenants in common, may be
seized and sold under execution. See title "Sheriff's
Sale." Leonard vs. Scarborough and wife and others

2. One co-tenant cannot maintain trover or trespass against
the others so long as the tenancy exists. Ib. -


1. Trover by an executor or administrator; when necessary
to introduce in evidence the letters testamentary or of
administration. See title "Evidence." Robinson vs. Mc-

2. Where the defendant purchased a negro at sheriff's sale
as the property of a third person, who was a stranger to
the plaintiff's title, used him as his own and exercised
dominion and control over him, it was held to be suffi
cient evidence of a conversion to maintain trover, with-
out evidence of a demand and refusal.



1. Trusts in personal property may be created and proven
by parol declarations. Kirkpatrick, Guardian vs. David-


2. When a cestui que trust may mortgage the trust estate.







« PreviousContinue »