TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Roseman v. Pless

R. P. Roseman and Wife Ann L. v. Jacob Pless, Administrator of P. I. Shaver.

Roseman v. Pless, 65 N.C. 374 (1871)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 5, 1871
Judges
Eeade, Boy
Citations
65 N.C. 374
Headnotes
An Administrator is guilty of gross lachea, who sells property on a credit, and takes no other security than the bond of the purchaser.
Summary
Action of debt tried before Cloud, Judge, at Spring Term, 1871, of Rowan Superior Court. The facts of the case sufficiently appear in the opinion of the Court.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Eeade

*375 Eeade, J.

There was but one exception ruled against the defendant, that in regard to the sale of the slave, and upon the ruling, the case is before the Court.

The defendant, as administrator, sold a slave of the estate in May, 1863, and took a bond for the price without surety. The purchaser of the slave.became insolvent, and the debt was lost.

In taking the account the administrator was charged with the amount, and he excepted. We think he was properly charged. It is gross negligence in an administrator to sell property on a credit, and take no security other than a bond of the purchaser.

If anything could save the administrator from blame, it would be to prove that the purchaser was entirely solvent; but that is not shown in this case. While the general rule is as stated, it is insisted that the peculiar circumstances of this case ought to relieve the administrator. The slave was sold to the widow of the intestate, and but for the result of the war, which the administrator could not foresee, the estate would have paid all the ■debts, and the widow entitled to a distributive share, how much does not appear. Slavery was in jeopardy by the war, and was abolished by the result. If the slave had not been sold he would have been lost to the estate; if he had sold the slave for cash, it would have been Confederate money, and would have been lost. These peculiar circumstances strongly inclined me to relieve the administrator, but the other Justices are unanimous, and I yield to the application of the general rule to this case.

There is no error.

Fee Cueiam. Judgment affirmed.

Note.—Justice Boy den having been of counsel, did not sit in this case.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1911: 219112026peak 1911 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Peele v. Powell156 N.C. 553 (1911)
  2. Peele v. Powell73 S.E. 234 (N.C. 1911)

Most recent

  1. Peele v. Powell73 S.E. 234 (N.C. 1911)
  2. Peele v. Powell156 N.C. 553 (1911)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list