State ex rel. Dobbins v. Osborne
| Decision Date | 30 June 1872 |
| Citation | 67 N.C. 259 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. DOBBINS v. OSBORNE, Adm'r., et al. |
Where a Guardian received from the Administrator, as part of his ward's distributive share, in 1864, a bond made by himself in 1862, he must account for the value of the bond as of the date it was given.
A plaintiff is not a competent witness to prove any transaction between himself and his deceased guardian; but he is competent to prove any other transaction of his guardian; e. g, a sale of his property by his guardian.
This was a civil action on a guardian bond, tried before Mitchell, J., at Fall Term, 1871, of IREDELL Superior Court.
The action was brought against the defendant Osborne, as administrator of W. W. Foote, guardian of the relator, and the other defendants as sureties on the bond. There was a reference to the clerk to state the account of the guardian. The clerk made a report to Fall Term, 1871, of the Superior Court, at which time exceptions were filed by the defendants. Upon the hearing of the exceptions before Mitchell, J., he overruled exceptions 1 and 3, and the second exception was admitted by the plaintiff. The facts found by his Honor on the 1st exception were as follows: “One Simmons was the administrator of Miles Dobbins, father of the relator. Miles Dobbins died in April, 1863, and Simmons qualified as his administrator in May, 1863. In May, 1862, W. W. Foote gave his note to the intestate for $300 in Confederate money. This note came into the hands of the administrator of Miles Dobbins, who transferred it to Foote, the guardian of the relator, and took his receipt and in these words, viz: “““Received of W. D. Simmons, adm'r. &c., three hundred and thirty-two dollars in cash notes, Feb. 24, 1864.
+----------------------------------------+
¦(Signed,) ¦W. W. FOOTE, Guardian of¦
+---------------+------------------------¦
¦A. A. DOBBINS.”¦ ¦
+----------------------------------------+
The Clerk, upon these facts, charged the guardian with the value of the note at the time it was given, in 1862. Defendant excepted to this part of the report. Exception overruled. The facts under the 3d exception are these, as found by his Honor: Plaintiff was examined as a witness, and swore that his guardian took from him sixty-two gallons of brandy, and sold the same, in 1864, for twelve hundred and fifty dollars in Confederate money. Defendants' co...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown v. Adams
...a transaction between W. M. Cameron and her husband, and as to that she was a competent witness notwithstanding her interest. Dobbins v. Osborne, 67 N. C. 259, McCall v. Wilson, 101 N. C. 600 , and Loftin v. Loftin, 96 N. C. 99 , are in point, as also Ballard v. Ballard, 75 N. C. 191 (quoti......
-
Brown v. Adams
...a transaction between W. M. Cameron and her husband, and as to that she was a competent witness notwithstanding her interest. Dobbins v. Osborne, 67 N.C. 259, McCall v. Wilson, 101 N.C. 600 , and Loftin v. Loftin, 96 N.C. 99 , are in point, as also Ballard v. Ballard, 75 N.C. 191 (quoting B......
-
Wingler v. Miller
... ... is too indefinite and uncertain: "2. Please state ... whether or not at any time prior to his death during the ... years ... § 1795. This Court ... said, in State ex rel. Dobbins v. Osborne, Adm'r, et al., ... 67 N.C. 259: "The plaintiff, it ... ...
-
Wingler v. Miller, 242.
...witness could not testify by reason of the provision of C.S. § 1795. This Court said, in State ex rel. Dobbins v. Osborne, Adm'r, et al., 67 N.C. 259: "The plaintiff, it is true, was not competent to prove any transaction between himself and his deceased guardian; but he was competent to pr......