# Lawson v. . Baer

> Supreme Court of North Carolina · June 5, 1860 · 52 N.C. 461

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3653641

## Case

- **Full name:** M. C. C. Lawson v. Elias Baer.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of North Carolina
- **Decided:** June 5, 1860
- **Citations:** 52 N.C. 461
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Pearson
- **Judges:** Pearson
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3653641

## Opinion text

Pearson, C. J.
A patent defect is one that may be discovered by the exercise of ordinary diligence. The mare, in reference to which the action was brought, “had a small knot on one of her legs, which (could be) easily seen by any one, and (was) slightly lame.” In the exercise of ordinary diligence, the purchaser of a horse should look at the legs and have the animal moved. So the defect, in this instance, was patent, and the charge of his Honor is supported by
Brown
v. Gray, '6th Jones’ Rep. 103, by which the law, in regard to patent and latent defects, is considered as settled.
The interrogatory put by his Honor:
“
Where was the evidence of the defendant’s having practiced such art?” may be taken as an intimation of an opinion that there was no such
*463
evidence, which was a matter proper for Mm to decide. We concur with him in the opinion, that there was no evidence of the fact. So, the defendant has no right to complain, that instead of deciding it absolutely, he “letthe jury take it$” and, as their verdict corresponds with his opinion and that of this Court, it set the matter right. There is no error.
Per CceiaM,
Judgment affirmed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3653641. Public record. Not legal advice.