Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

6 N.C. 286

Boyt v. . Cooper

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 5, 1813

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1813-06-05

Martin. This was an action of debt on a sealed instrument. The Defendant pleaded ce that it was given for an illegal consideration” On the trial, the Defendant wished to give evidence, tiiat the bond was given in consideration of compounding a prosecution for a rape. This was opposed on the ground, that the Defendant’s plea was not sufficiently special for such evidente to be received. This point was rescued by the Court.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 1792

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1813-06-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Tatxok, Chief-Justice,

¶1 delivered the opinion of the Court:

¶2 Tiie memorandum of illegal consideration,” made on the docket, is entirely too indefinite to apprise the Plaintiff of the point on which Defendant actually relied. Of the numberless illegal considerations for which a bond may be given, it would be highly unreasonable to expect, that in every instance, the Plaintiff should understand that one precisely, which the Defendant intended to urge, when he entered his plea. But having guessed rightly, and summoned witnesses to explain the intended defence, what should prevent the Defendant from afterwards shifting his ground, and setting up some other objection to the bond, which the Plaintiff may be altogether unprepared to repel ? But upon looking into the affidavit filed in the case, the Court are of opinion that the Defendant ought to have leave to amend the pjea} and as he instructed his counsel ia due season, *288 what was the nature of his defence, the justice of the cause, seems to require that the amendment should'be-made without costs,

/6/nc/286 · .json · Public domain