Legal Opinion

Smith v. Starnes

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided April 24, 1968No. 68SC81PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrock, J.

When this case was called for trial, the parties stipulated that plaintiffs are successors in title to Lot No. 1 and defendants are successors in title to Lot No. 2 according to a partition by commissioners in a special proceeding in 1912 entitled Jenkins v. Jones, Caldwell County Superior Court. The plaintiffs then offered into evidence the full report of the partition by commissioners which contains a description by metes and bounds of both Lot No. 1 and Lot No. 2. Lot No. 1, now owned by the plaintiffs, lies contiguous to and south of Lot No. 2, now owned by the defendants.

Immediately…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. W. M. Ritter Lumber Co. v. Montvale Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
  2. Lumber Co. v. . Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
  3. Wynne v. . AlexanderSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1847

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Roberts v. StewartCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1968
  2. State v. FarrellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1968
  3. Reece v. ReeceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969
  4. State v. JusticeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969
  5. State v. SquiresCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1968

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API