Adm'x of Ufford v. Lucas

• Citation: 9 N.C. 214
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decision Date: 31 December 1822
• Parties: ADMINISTRATRIX OF UFFORD v. LUCAS.—From Hyde.

9 N.C. 214

ADMINISTRATRIX OF UFFORD

v.LUCAS.—From Hyde.

SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA

DECEMBER TERM, 1822

Admissions made to the sheriff by an individual that he had no title to a slave on which the sheriff had levied an execution are not conclusive evidence of the want of title in the person making the admission. Where during the pendency of a suit leave is obtained to amend the writ and change the form of action, though such amendment be not made on the record, if the suit be tried in its amended form, this Court will consider the amendment as having been actually made.

FROM the record transmitted to the Court in this case it appeared that the writ was in detinue for a negro slave Lewis, and that during the pendency of the proceedings in the court below leave was obtained

to amend the writ, hut it did not appear from the record that any amendment had ever been made. The case was considered and tried in the court below as an action of trover.

It appeared that in 1811 a judgment had been obtained against one Bell, on which executions had regularly issued to the coroner of the county of Hyde, who, after the death of Bell, levied on the negro Lewis, in the possession of one John Ufford, his executor, and on 7 July, 1818, sold the same at public sale to one Dukes.

It was proved on the trial that during the bidding Dukes was sent for by Ufford, who was sick at the time; that the bidding was suspended during his absence, and that on his return Dukes said that Ufford directed him to buy, and he accordingly bid off the negro. It further appeared that previous to the sale Ufford had been heard to request Dukes to purchase the negro for him. The coroner testified that Dukes paid him about $20 of the purchase money, that the balance of it was never paid him by any one, but from a belief that it had in some manner been settled by Ufford, he executed to Ufford abill of sale for the negro, and immediately after the sale the negro went into the possession of Ufford. Dukes testified that Ufford was indebted to him at the time of the sale in the sum of $200; that Ufford requested him as his agent to purchase the negro at the sale, stating that by the purchase he would be enabled to pay the debt of $200, and another debt due one Jordan. Dukes was instructed by Ufford to bid to the amount of $375 for the negro, and after the sale Dukes, at the request of Ufford, paid to the coroner $50, the amount of the execution. The testimony of a witness, Blount, proved that he had previous to the sale been requested by Ufford to act as his agent in the purchase of the negro, but afterwards Ufford declined his assistance. After the sale Ufford requested witness to ascertain what price could be obtained for the negro from a trader in slaves then in the place. This witness also proved that Dukes demanded from the coroner a bill of sale for the negro and that the officer replied it was not then convenient to give him one, but that he would do so at some future time; that the coroner demanded also of Dukes the amount that...