From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Blount v. Porterfield

Superior Court of North Carolina
Jan 1, 1802
3 N.C. 161 (N.C. Super. 1802)

Opinion

(Spring Riding, 1802.)

Advertising in a newspaper printed in the county is equivalent to advertising in other places in the county as directed by the act of 1789 (1 Rev. Stat., ch. 46, sec. 16).

SCIRE FACIAS to have execution of a judgment obtained against Porterfield, and amongst other things was pleaded the act of 1789, for barring the claim of creditors if not exhibited within two years. Defendant proved the advertisement required by the act, except as to the public places in the county, but to supply that it was proved that a paper was printed within the county, and that the advertisement was made in that county.


That is equivalent to advertising at other public places within the county, and is, therefore, sufficient.

Cited: McLin v. McNamara, 22 N.C. 85.


Summaries of

Blount v. Porterfield

Superior Court of North Carolina
Jan 1, 1802
3 N.C. 161 (N.C. Super. 1802)
Case details for

Blount v. Porterfield

Case Details

Full title:BLOUNT v. PORTERFIELD'S ADMINISTRATORS

Court:Superior Court of North Carolina

Date published: Jan 1, 1802

Citations

3 N.C. 161 (N.C. Super. 1802)

Citing Cases

McLin v. McNamara

The act of 1789 imposes as a condition on an executors or (85) administrator an advertisement at the…