Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

52 N.C. 461

Lawson v. . Baer

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 5, 1860

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1860-06-05

This was an action on the oase for a deceit in the exchange of horses, tried before SauNdees, J., at the Eall Term, 1859, of Lenoir Superior Court. The following bill of exceptions is sent up as part of the record : “ Smith, a witness for the plaintiff, testified that he was present at the trade. Defendant said she was the Davis mare. Witness asked why she was so poor? Defendant replied, she bad been hauling turpentine with mules.

Cited in Black's (1910)’s definition of “Patent” · Black's (1910)’s definition of “Patent defect”

Decided 1860-06-05

Pearson, C. J.

¶1 A patent defect is one that may be discovered by the exercise of ordinary diligence. The mare, in reference to which the action was brought, “had a small knot on one of her legs, which (could be) easily seen by any one, and (was) slightly lame.” In the exercise of ordinary diligence, the purchaser of a horse should look at the legs and have the animal moved. So the defect, in this instance, was patent, and the charge of his Honor is supported by Brown v. Gray, '6th Jones’ Rep. 103, by which the law, in regard to patent and latent defects, is considered as settled.

¶2 The interrogatory put by his Honor: Where was the evidence of the defendant’s having practiced such art?” may be taken as an intimation of an opinion that there was no such *463 evidence, which was a matter proper for Mm to decide. We concur with him in the opinion, that there was no evidence of the fact. So, the defendant has no right to complain, that instead of deciding it absolutely, he “letthe jury take it$” and, as their verdict corresponds with his opinion and that of this Court, it set the matter right. There is no error.

Per CceiaM,

¶3 Judgment affirmed.

/52/nc/461 · .json · Public domain