M'Ree's Heirs v. Alexander
Supreme Court of North Carolina
~t t From Mecklenburg. J Petition to vacate a grant. The petitioners set forth, that in the year 1806 the defendant obtained a grant for seventy acres of land, which before the war of the revolution had been granted to their father, who lived and died possessed of the same, and that the title thereto descended to the petitioners, who were his heirs at law: that these facts were well known to the defendant when he obtained his grant, and therefore the petitioners charged that…
Read the full summary
~t t From Mecklenburg. J Petition to vacate a grant. The petitioners set forth, that in the year 1806 the defendant obtained a grant for seventy acres of land, which before the war of the revolution had been granted to their father, who lived and died possessed of the same, and that the title thereto descended to the petitioners, who were his heirs at law: that these facts were well known to the defendant when he obtained his grant, and therefore the petitioners charged that the defendant’s grant was obtained by fraud, false suggestions, and contrary to law; and concluded with praying that a…
1Opinion
It is first objected that the act of 1777, the (327) entry law, does not declare such grants as the present to be void, for that the clause in that law declaring all grants issued contrary to the provisions of that act to be void relates exclusively to grants for vacant land. The act excludes from entry all lands heretofore granted; and the clause in question declares all grants issued contrary to the provisions of that act to be void. This land had been before that time granted; another grant, for it, under color of the provisions of the act, is contrary to such provisions. I think it,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Holland's Heirs v. CrowSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1851
- Dawson v. . ShepherdSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1834