Case ID: nc_136/html/0088-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Walker, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

GUANO CO. v. EDWARDS.
    (Filed September 27, 1904).
    For head-note to this ease, see Chemical Company against Edwards, at this term, 136 N. C., 73.
    AotioN by tbe Pocomoke Guano Company against B. W. Edwards, beard by Judge Frederick Moore, at December Term, 1903, of tbe Superior Court of Geebne County, From a judgment for tbe defendant tbe plaintiff appealed.
    
      L. V. Morrill and R. W. Peatross, for the plaintiff.
    
      George M. Lindsay, for the defendant.
   Walker, J.

There is no material difference between tbe facts in this case and those in Chemical Co. v. Edwards, decided at this term. 136 N. C., 73. It was provided in tbe contract under which tbe guano was shipped to Sugg, that the notes and accounts of fertilizers sold by him should be sent to tbe plaintiff and by tbe latter returned to Sugg for collection. Then follows this clause: “All proceeds as collected must be first applied to tbe payment of your obligations to us, whether tbe same shall have matured or not.” This provision, which is not in the contract, construed in the other case, requires an immediate application of the proceeds of collections to the payment of the indebtedness, and if it changes the nature of the transaction at all affords still stronger reason why we should adhere to our decision that, under the facts and circumstances presented and the terms of the contract, the plaintiff is not entitled to prove for his full debt against the estate of the decedent Sugg, but only for the amount remaining after deducting the payment.

Affirmed.