Opinion
(April Term, 1795.)
A slave wrongfully taken out of the possession of A, and sold to B, and while in the possession of B sold by A to C, may be recovered by C in a suit brought in his own name.
ACTION brought for the recovery of a negro boy. It appeared upon evidence that old William Stone was the owner of the boy, and that his son John Stone, being about to move to South Carolina, had gotten the boy into his possession; that he sold him as his property to the defendant; that the defendant had retained the possession of him as his own ever since; that after the sale, and whilst Stuart had him in possession, the old man demanded him, and then sold him by a bill of sale executed to Robertson; that then Robertson demanded the boy of the defendant, and soon after brought this suit in his own name. The exception taken at the trial, and afterwards in arrest of judgment, was that this negro when sold by the old man to the plaintiff was a chose in action, and not transferable, and that therefore Robertson could not maintain this action in his own name.
Mr. Whyte for defendant.
General Davie for plaintiff.
And at October Term, 1795, this cause was again argued, as I have understood from the counsel, and there was a judgment for the plaintiff, per ASHE and MACAY, JJ.
See Morgan v. Bradley, 10 N.C. 559, and Steadman v. Riddick, 11 N.C. 29, which latter case seems contra.