Winborne v. . Downing
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was a civil action, tried at Fall Term, 1889, of Hektpord Superior Court, before Brown, J., to recover the land specified in the complaint.
Read the full summary
This was a civil action, tried at Fall Term, 1889, of Hektpord Superior Court, before Brown, J., to recover the land specified in the complaint. It appears that the defendants William Downing and Celia Downing were husband and wife before and after the 1st day of October, 1861; that on that day the former undertook and purported to execute to his said wife a deed, conveying to her the land in controversy, and the following is a copy of such parts thereof as need be reported here: “ That, for and in consideration of her interest in the tract of land known as the Ham-11 Farm, it being the same…
1Opinion of the Court
Merrimon, C. J.:
The husband could not, anterior to the present Constitution, make a deed conveying real estate to his wife, valid at law, but it is properly conceded by the appellant that such a deed would be upheld in equity if the same were founded upon a valuable consideration. Huntly v. Huntly, 8 Ired. Eq., 250; Garner v. Garner, Bush. Eq., 1; Walton v. Parish, 95 N. C., 259.
The consideration of the deed in question from the defendant William Downing to his wife was a valuable one, and hence that deed must be upheld as sufficient and efficient against the plaintiff in this action, unless,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hicks v. . BullockSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
- Bunn v. . WellsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
- Graybeal v. . DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
- Walton v. . ParishSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
- Ricks v. . PulliamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
3Cited by4 opinions
- Carolina Real Estate Co. v. BlandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
- Whichard v. WhitehurstSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
- Mitchell v. . MitchellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
- Whichard v. . WhitehurstSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921