The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1902-03-16
Supreme Court Decisions
reported by Jos. L. Seawell.)
lReported by Jos. L. Seawell.l

(Reported by Jos. l.. Seawell)
| SPRUILL ct al. VS.. BRANNING MEG
CO, appellant. From BERTHE. Affirmed.
Where husband and wife held land by
entirety and the husband died, the stat
ute. as to the wife, began to run against
an action for trespass upCH the lard, ri
the husbands death.
FAM VS.. SOUTHERN RAILWAY co.
From Cherokee.
While it is the duty of a Superior court
clerk TO prepare and send up a trans
cript of appeal TO the Supreme court
within 30 days after the case on appeal
is settled, his negligence in failing to do
so will not excuse the laches of appel
liant in failing to have his appeal dock
eted within the time required by Supreme
Court Rules.
LAMB VS.. BAXTER, appellant. From
Pasquotank Affirmed.
contract to pay a real estate broker
for services in effecting a sale of land
is not within the statute of frauds and
need not be in writing. Abbott Us. Hunt,
100 n, c.. 403.
The rule that an agent cannot in the
same transaction represent both buyer
and seller does not apply where it APP
pears that the agent Informed buyer and
seller that he was acting for both.
WINSLOW. appellant. VS.. BENTON ct al.
From Perquimans. Error.
Who're an action must be brought by a
personal representative the limitation (if
it would otherwise expre) is extended for
one year from the death of the creditor;
but if the action must be brought against
] IT. -,
ton Off it would otherwise expire), is ex-
tended for one year from the issuing of
letters testamentary or of administers
ton.
FINCH appellant. VS.. STRICKLAND
From Nash, Appeal dismissed.
The Supreme court will not pass upon
the materiality of matter omitted from
the transcript and which was directed by
the trial Judge to be sent up; and where
in such case the appellant directed the
clerk not to incorporate the matter in the
transcript, it's absence IS ground for dis
missing the appeal.
/ BRINKLEY VS.. SPRUILL ct al, appel
lants From Washington Error
Where one conveys land to his children
without consideration, after having prom
Used to convey he land to his intended
wife in consideration Of marriage. the
deed although registered before marriage
is fraud upon the marital rights OF the
wife and is void as to her. but is not
void as to a subsequent purchaser for
full consideration and without notice
from one of the children.
VANN. petitioner VS.. EDWARDS. From
Hartford Petition to rehear dismissed
This decision sustains former ruling
/ OPS N. C. 425) to the effect that the in
/ dorsement and transfer of her note by
married woman without the consent OF
her husband does not invest title in the
! ndOrsee
/ The possession of note by an indorsee
! of a married woman is presumed to he
/ lawful where the note was in possession
of the husband after the Endorsement.
I sKITTL ETHARPE " SKITTLETHARPE
! appellant. From; Washington, Remand
ed.
/ Where the husband abandons the wife
/ and fails 20 provide her and her child
with a support. and there being no pro
/ ceeding for dover pending, the wife is
entitled under section 1892 of The Code
to have reasonable subsistence secured
! to her and the child of their marriage
from the estate of her husband TO be as
certained by the Judge, according to the