Long v. . Mason

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Long v. . Mason, 84 N.C. 15 (N.C. 1881)
Ruffin

Long v. . Mason

Opinion of the Court

Ruffin, J.

An alteration of a bond in a material part by a party to it, vacates the same, except as to parties consenting thereto. Davis v. Coleman, 7 Ired., 424; Draper v. Wood, 112 Mass., 315. An addition of the words “ interest at six per cent,” written in a corner of the.bond after it had been signed, is an alteration of it in a material particular. *17 ■'3 Addison -on Contracts,-§ 1-280. Tire in'tent 'with which the alteration is ma.de seems according to the weight of -authorities to be immaterial-; but however that may be, it has been decided by this -court in Dunn v. Clements, 7 Jones 58, that whenever -a -material alteration'has -been made,-a lpresumption -of fra'ud arises, and remains '-until -rebutted. There was no-evidence offered on the trial to remove this ¡presumption.

We therefore‘concur with His -Honor in the -opinion that %he defendant was entitled to .judgment.

-No error. -Affirmed-. '

Reference

Full Case Name
John H. Long v. Louisa Mason, Admx.
Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published