Bell v. Bell, 5 N.C. 95, 1 Mur. 95 (1805)

Dec. 1805 · Supreme Court of North Carolina

5 N.C. 95, 1 Mur. 95

Arthur Bell vs. Benjamin Bell

—From Fayetteville.

This was an action on the case, to which-the defendant pleaded in abatement that the plaintiff resided in .the state of Georgia, that lie the defendant resided in the district 'Newbern, and this not being a local action tiiat he ought not to be compelled to answer thereto in any other court than that of the district in which he resided. To this plea the fiaintiff replied that the beneficial interest in the suit was in oshua Bell, and not in Arthur Bell, the nominal plaintiff; that the said Joshua Bell was at the time of issuing the writ -in this case an inhabitant of and resident in the county Anson within the district of Fayetteville, &c. To this replication the defendant demurred, and the plaintiff having joined in demurrer, the case was sent to this court for the opiuion of the Judges.

abatement pialntíffhre-the Georgia, & defendant ¿e”district of°^eJu1^™ not tó^be to answer Fayetteville co“he ^uedutimt l°¿d beneficial interest in the that he re-Fayetteville a‘3triet' ■fiie ddeii* red to tins -Km-e?overruled

Bx macax, taxioR and iocke — Judge

Let the demurrer be overruled with costs.

Hall—Judge

Bell is the plaintiff of record, and the act of 1777, ch. 2, directs that “ where the plaintiff shall reside beyond seas, or in a different state, the ¿hit shall be brought to the court of the district where the defendant resides, and where suit is brought otherwise than is therein directed, it may be abated, on the jilea of the do Pendant.” A court of law will not take notice of. the trust between Anthony Bell and Joshua Bell, and recognize tin-latter as plaintiff when the record declares that the former jg plaintiff