Merrimon ex rel. Paxton v. Norton, 67 N.C. 115 (1872)

June 1872 · Supreme Court of North Carolina

67 N.C. 115

EMORY H. MERRIMON, to the use of SARAH PAXTON vs. WM. NORTON, Adm’r. of W. C. KILGORE, W. P. POORE and B. C. LANKFORD.

The issues submitted to a jury in an action upon a note given in May, 1864, being as to the execution of the note and the currency in which it was solvable; Held, that a verdict, finding “all issues in favor of the plaintiff for the value of Confederate money,” is sufficient to support'a judgment for the amount due according to the legislative scale.

Civil action, commenced in Buncombe Superior Court, after-wards removed to Henderson and tried at Spring Term, 1872, of the Superior Court, before Ilenry, J.

The opinion contains a sufficient statement of the case.

Phillips c& Merrimon, for the plaintiff.

No counsel for the defendant.

Boyden,'J.

This was a civil action, brought upon a-note for two thousand dollars, dated the 10th of May, 1864, and this note had been'properly assigned to the plaintiff.

The execution of the note was admitted by the defendants Poore and Lanford, but denied on-the part of Norton for his intestate, Kilgore.

The following issues are submitted to the jury: 1st. «Did W. C. Kilgore execute the note sued on, as alleged in the complaint?” 2nd. “Was the note sued on to he paid in good money or par money?”

His Honor states that the whole contest in the evidence, was as to how the note was to be payable — whether in Confederate money, or money of the value of legal currency. None of the evidence given on the trial is stated. The Court charged the j ury that, if they found that the agreement was to pay in good money, they should find a verdict for the whole amount of the note, and interest, in present currency.

The jury returned the following verdict: “We find all the issues in favor oí the plaintiff for the v^lue of Confederate money.”

The plaintiff moved lor a new trial, for what reason does not appear. The plaintiff then moved for judgment for the amount of the note, with interest from its date, in the present currency.

This motion was refused, and judgment was rendered for ---dollars, the amount due according to the scale, at the date of the note. It is true the verdict of the jury is somewhat irregular, but it does not appear that there was any motion made to correct the verdict.

It does appear, that hotli parties offered evidence before the jury as to funds in which the payment was to be made. There was no objection to the evidence offered, and the question seems to have been fairly submitted to the jury, as to what funds the note was to be paid in ; and although the jury say “ they find the issues in favor of the plaintiff,” they further say for the value of Confederate money, and the Court rendered judgment for the value of the note in Confederate money, according to the scale as of the date of the note.

There is no error. Judgment affirmed. This will be certified.

Pee Cueiam. Judgment affirmed.