Nash, J. Whatever error the Judge may have committed in the opinion he expressed as to the insufficiency of the ca. sa. produced in evidence, the Court cannot look into it. Among other defences, the defendant pleaded, tha,t the debt recovered by the plaintiffs was paid; and the jury have found that plea to be true, as well as the others. This finding puts the construction on the ca. sa. out of the question. The cases of Morrisey v.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Hall, McRae & Co. v. Woodside. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 1 opinion
HALLv. WOODSIDE,30 N.C. 119(1847)
HALL, McRAE CO. v. ROBERT W. WOODSIDE ET AL.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Where on asci. fa. against bail the pleas were, noca. sa. issued and payment and the jury found all the issues in favor of the defendant, this Court will not inquire into the correctness of the charge of the judge as to one of the pleas only, that of the validity of theca. sa.
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Law of BRUNSWICK, at Spring Term, 1847,Battle, J., presiding.
This was ascire faciasagainst the Sheriff of Brunswick County as special bail for one David Treadwell, against whom the plaintiffs had recovered a judgment. The defendants pleadednul tiel record, payment, statute of limitations, noca. sa. issued, noca. sa. returned. Much controversy existed as to the sufficiency of theca. sa. The presiding judge charged the jury that theca. sa. produced was void, as not corresponding (120) with the judgment; whereupon they returned a verdict in favor of the defendant onallthe issues; and from the judgment the plaintiffs appealed.
No counsel for plaintiffs.Strangefor defendants.
NASH, J.
Whatever error the judge may have committed in the opinion he expressed as to the insufficiency of theca. sa. produced in evidence, the Court cannot look into it. Among other defenses the defendant pleaded that the debt recovered by the plaintiffs was paid; and the jury have found that plea to be true, as well as the others. This finding puts the construction on theca. sa. out of the question.Morrisey v. Bunting,12 N.C. 3, andBullock v. Bullock,14 N.C. 260, are direct authorities. And this we must especially hold, because it appears from the case that the debt was in fact, paid; for the debt and costs amounted to the sum of $209.36, and upon afi. fa. the sheriff returned the sale of a negro for $307.
PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed.
NOTE. — The cases ofPatrick MurphyandIsaac Northropagainst the same defendants, depending upon the same principle, were determined in the same way at this term.Page 96
(121)