Doe on demise of Register v. Roe
Supreme Court of North Carolina
From Columbus. Ejectment, tried before Paxton, Judge, in the Superior Court of Columbus, at its Fall Sessions, 1821. The lessors of the Pial. th? claimed under a patent grani.-d to ^ov''ar(:’ regularly deduced title down to James Register, who by deed on the 7th of July, 1819, conveyed to the I .sors of the Plaintiff.
Read the full summary
From Columbus. Ejectment, tried before Paxton, Judge, in the Superior Court of Columbus, at its Fall Sessions, 1821. The lessors of the Pial. th? claimed under a patent grani.-d to ^ov''ar(:’ regularly deduced title down to James Register, who by deed on the 7th of July, 1819, conveyed to the I .sors of the Plaintiff. On the Din of August, 1816, the ‘and was exposed to sale for taxes bv the 3¡:er;i:of Colin,ifeu-, and James Register became the purchaser, not having'-greed to pay the taxes for a less quantify thaw the " hole land j and on the 28th of February, 1818, the ' u-r'fif executed…
1Opinion of the Court
Hall, Judge.
The. principal question here, is, whether the sale of Re land for taxes, divested the true of James Register. K it did not, the Plaintiff is entitfed to recover the land in the present action. When James Register became t;,j highest bidder for the whole land, and bid therefor a amount of all the taxes that were due upon it, such bid became the bid of the Governor, by the act of 1798, ch. 492, Rev. Code. That act declares, sec. 4, “that if person shall bid a smaller quantity than the whole, then the whole of the land so set up shall fee considered as a bid for the Governor, and the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- United States of America, Donny Brurell Buckley, Intervening v. Board of School Commissioners of the City of Indianapolis, IndianaCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1974
- Jones v. . GibsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1816