{
  "id": 11978223,
  "name": "The assignees of Barclay vs. Carson",
  "name_abbreviation": "Assignees of Barclay v. Carson",
  "decision_date": "1803-05",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "243",
  "last_page": "244",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "2 Hayw. 243"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "3 N.C. 243"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Super. Ct.",
    "id": 22358,
    "name": "North Carolina Superior Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 124,
    "char_count": 1570,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.321,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.4033266686372354e-08,
      "percentile": 0.33901493870878185
    },
    "sha256": "195293446b45b1f722bc72a044d0ea9556d33336c4d0c697f9726e6116b3766c",
    "simhash": "1:c5424f10543473f7",
    "word_count": 287
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:25:52.833864+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "The assignees of Barclay vs. Carson."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "HpAY'XaGK, Judge.\n-This being an action against a debtor of \"5- the bankrupt, producing the commission and assignment;, Is a proof of the trading, bankruptcy, the time thereof, and appointing the plaintiffs assignees. Were this a debt due from Gibbs and Barclay, I am of opinion, that as the assignees o\u00a3 Barclay had sued, and r.o plea in abatement put in, that they may recover a moiety. I am of opinion also, that a creditor of Gibbs and Barclay, rsay be a witness to prove T Barclay, if it be proved that the separate estate of Barclay will not suffice to pay his separate crediters : for, as the creditor upon the joint !und must first apply to the joint fund, and the separate creditors to the separate fund, if this latter be exhausted, by the separate creditors, a creditor in the joint fund can have no interest in placing the demand in Question in the separate fund ; and in so doing, he diminishes the jointfund out of which his dividend is to come. I am of opinion also, that Gibbs, the other partner and bankrupt, may b,e admitted as a witness to prove the debt due to Barclay, for that tends to diminish the fund out of which his allowance is to come.\nA demand against the bankrupt, which the defendant has acquired since the bankruptcy, cannot by the express words of the act, be set off against the assignees. Of this nature is a debt paid by the defendant since the bankruptcy, as a surety before i so also is a debt arisen by delivery of goods to the bankrupt by the defendant since the act of bankruptcy committed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "HpAY'XaGK, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The assignees of Barclay vs. Carson."
  },
  "file_name": "0243-01",
  "first_page_order": 247,
  "last_page_order": 248
}