King v. . Scoggin
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was a civih action for the recovery of land tried before MacRae, J., and a jury, at Spring Term, 1884, of Ruther-eoed Superior Court.
Read the full summary
This was a civih action for the recovery of land tried before MacRae, J., and a jury, at Spring Term, 1884, of Ruther-eoed Superior Court. The facts are as follows: George Hay, Sr., owned the land in dispute aud was in possession from 1815, and conveyed the same to George Hay, Jr., his son, in 1838 in fee, and died in 1840. George Hay, Jr., was in possession until his death in 1842. George Hay, Sr., had three children, James, Sarah and George, Jr. James went away thirty years ago and never was heard of. Sarah married George Suttle and died, leaving two children, Sarah and Mary, who are the…
1Opinion of the CourtAshe, J.
George Hay, the owner of the fee-simple of the land in controversy, devised it. to his son, George Hay, Jr., who occupied it until lii.s death in 1842.
George Hay, Sr., had three children, James, Sarah, and George, •Jr. James, it is supposed, died many years ago without issue. Sarah married one Suttle, and had two children, Sarah and Mary, who are the four plaintiffs in this action.
George Hay, Jr., married Martha Wesson, who, before her marriage, had two illegitimate chiidren, George Wesson and Mary Wesson, and none after marriage. George Hay, Jr., left a will, in which he devised the land to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Vanderheyden v. CrandallNew York Supreme Court · 1846
3Cited by8 opinions
- Graybeal v. . DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
- Early v. Early.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Thompson v. . BattsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
- Blanchard v. WardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
- Privett v. JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.