In covenant by an administrator, non est factum pleaded, the handwriting of the plaintiff, who was the only subscribing witness, was permitted to be proved, but the Court also required proof of the signature of the defendant.
This was objected to by Slade, for the defendant: but
Admitted by the Court, WILLIAMS, J., and HAYWOOD, J.
And proof having given of the subscribing witness' handwriting:
WILLIAMS, J., required that the signature of the defendant should also be proved.
HAYWOOD, J., tacente.
It was accordingly done, and the plaintiff had a verdict.
NOTE. — See the note to Hamilton v. Williams, 2 N.C. 139, and the cases there referred to, and also the case of Saunders v. Ferrill, 23 N.C. 97.
Cited: Ballard v. Ballard, 75 N.C. 192.
(72)