Wesson v. Stephens

Decided June 15, 1843

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1843-06-15

<p>A delivery of a deed to a third person for the-use of the grantee, makes it ef-feetual fronrthe instant of such delivery, although the person is not the a gent, hut a stranger to the grantee, provided the grantee afterwards assents to it.</p> <p>Where the grantor inserts in his deed a release for the purchase money, when he has not actually received it or taken' a security for its payment, Equity will give him- relief.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 1949

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1843-06-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Daniel, J.

¶1A delivery of a deed'to a third person, for the use of the grantee, makes it effectual from the intsant of such delivery, although the person is not the agent but a stranger to the grantee, provided the grantee assents to it, which in this case he did. Alford v Lee, Cro. Eliz. 54.— Garnons v Knight, Barn. &. C. 671. The witnesses do not prove directly that the deed contained a release clause of the purchase money, but they say that the deed was “in due form.” We must understand that it did contain such a release, and therefore that the plaintiff is entitled to the decree he prays.

¶2Per CuRrAM. Decree accordingly.