This case is not influenced by the principles that decided the case of Streeter v. Jones. The plaintiffs allege here, that the defendant, contrary to the agreement he had entered into, which was to purchase the property for the complainants, took an absolute deed to himself.—The complainants were not privy to that deed, and of course are not bound by it. They are therefore at liberty to produce parol testimony to establish the original contract.
Strong v. Glasgow, 4 N.C. 279, 1 Car. L. Rep. 279 (1811)
July 1811
·
Supreme Court of North Carolina
4 N.C. 279, 1 Car. L. Rep. 279
Strong and others v. Glasgow and others.
The bill in Equity states, that William Sheppard, the father of the complainants, being considerably indebted, with a view to provide payment, came to an agreement with B. Sheppard, to convey to him a tract of land, for which B. Sheppard was to convey to W. Sheppard two other tracts of in*280ferior value by 800 pounds; to satisfy which difference, B. Sheppard was to pay off all the debts, and indemnify, Wm. Sheppard from them. That soon after the agreement, Wm. Sheppard died; and one of his creditors obtained judgment, and took out execution, which was levied on his slaves, and at the sale, B. Sheppard, intending to perform his agreement, bid off twelve slaves at the price of 133/. for the benefit of the, complainants. That he took an absolute bill of sale from the sheriff to himself, but that the purchase was really made in trust and for the benefit of the complainants.
The question, reserved was, Whether it was competent to the complainants to prove the bond by parol evidence; which was submitted without argument.