--=====================_1018398345==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" For the Supreme Court Cases Should be entitle - Supreme Court #2440 - Carr vs Holliday --=====================_1018398345==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="CARR VS HOLLIDAY.txt" CARR VS HOLLIDAY =96 Supreme Court Case #2440 & 4310 Greene County NOTE: There are two different folders with two separate numbers for this= case but it=20 appears the papers in each are duplicates. This abstract was taken from= #2440 but 4310=20 was checked briefly. In the folder 4310 the only difference I saw was= TILGHMAN=20 HOLLIDAY was referred to several times as JOHN HOLLIDAY and the date was= 1847.=20 It is possible that a close reading of the case would indicate that TILGHMAN= =20 HOLLIDAY had died but I noticed in the index cards there were several cases= with the=20 same names with different numbers. Time was a problem in reading the 2nd= folder in=20 detail. SARAH CARR guardian of ROBERT CARR a lunatic against TILGHMAN=20 HOLLIDAY =96 filed 20 December 1835 ROBERT CARR was the son of ROBERT S. CARR dec and SARAH CARR =96 by the=20 death of his father ROBERT CARR became entitled to property of a= considerable estate=20 consisting of land, Negroes and money =96 value of $10,000 to $12,000 =96= for sometime had=20 symptoms of derangement and insanity =96 he became 21 years of age on 10 Jan= 1829 =96=20 since becoming 21 he has been duped and taken advantage of and lead to= intoxication in=20 order to get his property TILGHMAN HOLLIDAY of Greene County continued to defraud him =96 HOLLIDAY=20 purchased a Negro woman Pansey or Fanny and her child worth about $350, and= a Negro=20 man named Dempsy worth about $250 or $300 and 1/3 of a tract of land called= Haw=20 Landing worth about $400 or $500 for which HOLLIDAY only paid with a stud= horse=20 worth about $150 or $200, a Negro boy Henry aged 6 or 7 years worth $150, a= note for=20 $140 on a credit of 12 months, a note on NATHAN LASSITER for $60 or $70 and= a=20 judgement on WILLIAM POPE for $94.35 =96 SARAH CARR says this is= insufficient=20 consideration HOLLIDAY resold the Negro woman Pansey/Fannie and child back to said ROBERT= =20 CARR for $400 SARAH CARR asked HOLLIDAY in a friendly manner to cancel the contract andhe= =20 refused (there should be another page right here but it appears to be missing) HOLLIDAY answers =96 he says ROBERT not a lunatic =96 and he did not take= advantage of=20 him. HOLLIDAY sold ROBERT the stud horse first on a note and then ROBERT= sold=20 him the Negro boy Edmund to pay the note and the horse was worth $400 =96= Negro boy=20 Edmund was worth $300 =96 then ROBERT sold Pansey/Fannie to HOLLIDAY =96=20 ROBERT had purchased a 1/3 part of Haw Landing using Pansey/Fannie as part= payment=20 (does not state from whom he purchased Haw Landing) NOTE: In places the name of the Negro woman looked like Pansey and in some= Fannie HOLLIDAY says all property was worth=20 Boy Edmund was deficient in eyesight and worth only $250 Dempsey was worth $400 1/3 of Haw Landing purchased for $400 sold for $300 =96 land was improved HOLLIDAY would take the stud horse back if SARAH would pay for the season ROBERT was declared a lunatic on 6 April 1829 and the transactions with= HOLLIDAY=20 were 10 Jan 1829 BEFORE ROBERT was declared a lunatic At this point in the case there were numerous depositions and from the= number of them=20 most everyone in that section of the county made a deposition and mostly= said the same=20 thing. Below are some of the people who gave a deposition UZZELL LASSITER =96 19 Sept 1834 =96 indicated ROBERT did not stay sober= very often=20 =96 lived =BD mile from ROBERT ROBERT DIXON =96 said ROBERT had common sense THEOPHILUS GRIMSLEY =96 ROBERT had common sense when sober HENRY KNOX =96 lived with family for one year =96 ROBERT had common sense HENRY S. TAYLOR =96 lived no more than a mile from ROBERT who had common=20 sense when sober WEST ELLIS =96 had good sense ALLEN CARR =96 common sense when sober JOHN TURNAGE =96 lived =BC mile from ROBERT =96 had common sense when sober= =20 which was not often DICK H. WILLIAM =96 common sense when sober JESSE GRIMSLEY =96 common sense when sober HENRY WILLIAMS =96 common sense when sober ROBERT E. ALLEN =96 knew father from the time he was 10 years old WYATT MOYE =96 questioned his mental ability RUFFIN GRAINGER =96 thought him deranged - in 1820 when he taught ROBERT at= =20 school in Sandy Run he was ok =96 3 years later he was drunk THOMAS MOORE =96 mind not sound BLANA BRAND =96 not good mind HENRY DAIL =96 in sound mind =96 knew the family and as a child ROBERT was= not of as=20 good a mind as his brother LEWIS ?? CHARLES JOINER =96 not capable EASON JOINER =96 lived 3 miles from him =96 lived with SARAH CARR for awhile= in=20 1832 and he died in 1833 (assume he was referring to ROBERT S. CARR) MICAJAH HART =96 did not know him well but he was a drunk WILLIAM SILABINT?? =96 not of sound mind FLETCHER ORMOND =96 did not know him well JOHN EASON =96 not of sound mind GATSY SILAVANT =96 weak minded LOUIZA EASON =96 not sure what to think WILLIAM G. HUDSON =96 was a WIT to the various Bills of Sale and did not see= =20 anything out of the ordinary =96 lived at Haws Landing at time of sale =96= stated that=20 HOLLIDAY did make improvements =96 HOLLIDAY did not get CARR drunk =96=20 sometimes ROBERT was rations and sometimes not =96 lived with HOLLIDAY= before=20 moving to Haw Landing HENRY MILLER =96 never saw him perfectly sober WADE BUTTS =96 did not know him well WILLIAM ORMOND =96 never sober THEOPHILUS DAIL =96 did not know him well HENRY DAIL =96 not well acquainted BLANEY TURNAGE =96 not capable There were many other deposition but all said the same thing At the end of the case it states that ROBERT CARR is deceased but it is not= clear if he=20 died before or during the case. Ruth Fentress sent this from the NC Reports >From The NC Reports: " On 12 May 1830, Sarah Carr filed present bill to have= the=20 property returned, etc. After filing of the bill, Robert Carr died, &= Sarah adm. on his=20 estate.=20 Judge Daniel: Court delares Robert Carr was a lunatic.=20 Verdict: Direct a reference=20 I just searched my NC Reports booklet and found in BOOK 40, p. 167,=20 SARAH CARR v. JNO HOLLIDAY, Greene(?) Dec. 1847.=20 Case under consideration of this Court June 1836, Robert Carr a lunatic. = Bill seeks to=20 rescind certain contracts entered into between the intestate Robert Carr and= the Deft. =20 Bill dismissed with cost. --=====================_1018398345==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" --=====================_1018398345==_--