Mask v. . Tiller
Supreme Court of North Carolina
EjectjibNT tried at Spring Term, 1883, of Richmond Superior Court, before MacRae, J. The plaintiff alleged that he was the owner in fee-simple of the land in dispute, and that defendants unlawfully withhold possession thereof.
Read the full summary
EjectjibNT tried at Spring Term, 1883, of Richmond Superior Court, before MacRae, J. The plaintiff alleged that he was the owner in fee-simple of the land in dispute, and that defendants unlawfully withhold possession thereof. In support .of his title, the plaintiff offered in evidence a deed from Walter F. Leak and wife to him, dated December 3, 1872. The defendants specifically denied each allegation of the complaint, and by way of counterclaim, alleged that Jack Ledbetter, their father, employed the plaintiff to purc!~ase the laud from said Leak, who was then the owner of it; that it was…
1Opinion of the CourtAshe, J.
The only question raised by the pleadings is whether the counterclaim set up by the defendants was barred by the statute of limitations. The plaintiff insists that it is barred by the •Code of Civil Procedure, §34, sub-sec. 9, which bars actions after three years, and as originally enacted, reads:
“An action for relief on the ground of fraud, in eases which heretofore were solely cognizable by courts of equity, the cause of action in such cases not to be deemed to have accrued until the discovery by the aggrieved party of the facts constituting fraud.”
This act was amended by the act of 1879,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Stith v. . McKeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882
3Cited by20 opinions
- Bowen v. DardenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- Norton v. . McDevitSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
- Spence v. . Pottery Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
- Grimes v. . AndrewsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
- Hemphill v. . HemphillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.