Robertson v. . Stuart

Superior Court of North Carolina

Decided April 5, 1795

Superior Court of North Carolina · decided 1795-04-05

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 1949

1 federal appellate ·

Relies on Morgan v. Bradley. · Stedman v. Riddick.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1795-04-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1And at October Term, 1795, this cause was again argued, as I have understood from the counsel, and there was a judgment for the plaintiff, per ASHE and MACAY, JJ.

¶2See Morgan v. Bradley, 10 N.C. 559, and Steadman v. Riddick, 11 N.C. 29, which latter case seems contra. *113

Download

Copy

Embed on your site

Hover to preview · click to copy the code

Search Wikipedia →

Case posture

Posture: ACTION brought for the recovery of a negro boy. It appeared upon evidence that old William Stone was the owner of the boy, and that his son John Stone, being about to move to South Carolina, had gotten the boy into his possession; that he sold him as his property to the defendant; that the defendant had retained the possession of him as his own ever since; that after the sale, and whilst Stuart had him in possession, the old man demanded him, and then sold him by a bill of sale executed to Robertson; that then Robertson demanded the boy of the defendant, and soon after brought this suit in his own name. The exception taken at the trial, and afterwards in arrest of judgment, was that this negro when sold by the old man to the plaintiff was a chose in action, and not transferable, and that therefore Robertson could not maintain this action in his own name.

Source: CourtListener

Court

Superior Court of North Carolina