{
  "id": 8683052,
  "name": "L. D. TRIPLETT and wife v. W. P. WITHERSPOON and others",
  "name_abbreviation": "Triplett v. Witherspoon",
  "decision_date": "1876-01",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "475",
  "last_page": "476",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "74 N.C. 475"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "8 Ired. 340",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ired.",
      "case_ids": [
        8692421
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/30/0340-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "8 Ired. 340",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ired.",
      "case_ids": [
        8692421
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/30/0340-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 182,
    "char_count": 2212,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.411,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.3784304845719355e-07,
      "percentile": 0.919211892276345
    },
    "sha256": "6b4bedafdf921650b629b30fc0cc8c50b49aaf21982f3fcf6a78b0d61a97dd1d",
    "simhash": "1:ad157c7d6759982e",
    "word_count": 395
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:08:39.099656+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "L. D. TRIPLETT and wife v. W. P. WITHERSPOON and others."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Reade, J.\nIf the plaintiffs\u2019 deed had not been lost, and had been registered, their title would have been perfect; for although their deed was fraudulent, as against creditors, and although Witherspoon, the defendants\u2019 intestate, was a purchaser for value, yet, as he purchased with knowledge of the fraudulent conveyance to the plaintiffs, he is bound by it. And this is under our statute of 1840, altering 27th Elizabeth. Hiatt v. Wade, 8 Ired., 340; Triplett v. Witherspoon, 70 N. C. Rep., 589.\nBut as the plaintiffs\u2019 deed is lost, and has not been registered, the legal title has not vested in them. Bat. Rev., chap. 35, sec. 1. Wilson v. Sparks, 72 N. C. Rep., 208; Hogan v. Strayhorn. 65 N. C. Rep., 279.\nOne of two things is necessary to be done before the legal title' can vest in the plaintiffs: set up the lost deed and register a copy, or declare the defendants trustees for them, and compel a conveyance of the legal title. This involves the aid \u25a0 of a Court of Equity. Equity will not interfere to set up any transaction founded in fraud ; certainly not against a purchaser for value, but will leave the parties to their legal rights..\nThere is error. This will be certified.\nPee CueiaM. Judgment accordingly.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Reade, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "O. N. Folk., for the appellants.",
      "li. F. Armfield and Johnstone Jones, contra."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "L. D. TRIPLETT and wife v. W. P. WITHERSPOON and others.\nA deed cannot be used to support a title until the same is proved and' registered; and if a deed be lost, which has never been proved- and registered, no legal title vests in the grantee.\nEquity will not interfere to enforce a contract founded in fraud; cer* tainly not against a purchaser for value, but will leave the parties to, their legal rights.\n{Hiatt v. Wade, 8 Ired. 340; Triplett v. Wiihenpoon, 70 N. C. Rep. 589 j Wi'son v. Sparlcs, 13 N. C. Rep. 208; and Hogan v. Strayhorn, 65 N. C. Rep. 279, cited and approved.)\nCivil Action-, in the nature of Ljcctment, tried before Furohes, J., at Fall Term, 1875, of the Superior Court of Caldwell county.\nThe case was before this court at January, 1874, and the-facts are fully reported in 70 N. C. Rep., 589.\nThere was a verdict and judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, \u25a0and the defendants appealed.\nO. N. Folk., for the appellants.\nli. F. Armfield and Johnstone Jones, contra."
  },
  "file_name": "0475-01",
  "first_page_order": 485,
  "last_page_order": 486
}