Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

16 N.C. 337

Alston v. . Foster

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 5, 1829

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1829-06-05

From Franklin. From Use pleadings ii appeared, fasti o»e Benjamin Hill dies! its the year 1790, bavkg: giver* to his wife Mary Hill, m life estate in sand?; slaves, with a remainder to his ri.i’dms. That the executor of the husband assented ia the legacy to the wife, and put tbs slaves into her pot/vssio», and soon afterwards she Intermarried with the Befemlani’s intestate.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently January 1816

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1829-06-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Henderson, Chief-Justice.

¶1 — It is unnecessary to examine into the fraud charged upon Euckaby, in affecting the Sheriff’s sale, under which he claims a part of the property. For by it lie certainly acquired no title, be it ever so fair, as the executor of Hill had, before the issuing of the execution under which the sale was made, assented to the legacy to Mill’s widow for life, whom Euckaby afterwards married. The Sheriff therefore was not authorized to sell, the negroes not being the estate of Mill in the hands of the executor. The property therefore remains in the same situation as if there had been no sale, its it is not so very clear, that the .sale was fraudulently procured by Euckaby, he must be allowed the purchase money paid by him.

¶2 The Clerk and Master will take an account of the hire of the negroes, and the money paid by Euckaby.

Per Curiam.

¶3 — Decree accordingly.

/16/nc/337 · .json · Public domain