Legal Opinion

Moore v. . Angel

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 5, 1895PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

In his complaint the plaintiff alleged that he held title and possession of a certain tract of land, which he described by metes and bounds, and charged that defendant had trespassed upon it. The defendant denied all these allegations and set up, by way of counter-claim, that he was the owner and was in the possession of a specified tract of land, a part of which was embraced in the boundaries of that described in the complaint. In order to support an action for simple trespass, a plaintiff must show, where any person is holding adversely, actual possession, but in the absence of adverse…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hurst, Miller & Co. v. EverettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
  2. Harris v. . SneedenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
  3. Little v. Town of LenoirSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
  4. Vanderbilt v. Johnson.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  5. Cowles v. . FergusonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Cody v. . EnglandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942

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

Powered by the Exa API