Legal Opinion

Cothran v. Akers Motor Lines, Inc.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 17, 1962No. 253PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRodman, J.

“Ejectment being a possessory action, it lies only where the lessor of the plaintiff could rightfully enter, and the title to support a recovery must therefore be inseparably connected with the right of possession, and must have this ingredient at least. The title of the defendant is entirely out of view. It is an old maxim that a man must recover by the strength of his own title in ejectment, not in consequence of any weakness in that of his adversary. Every plaintiff in ejectment, says Lord Mansfield, in Atkins v. Hord, must show a right of possession, as well as a right of property. . .”…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Mobley v. . GriffinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
  2. Locklear v. . SavageSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
  3. Hayes v. RicardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  4. Gudger v. . HensleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1880
  5. Williams v. . BuchananSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1841

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Arthur J. Fulcher, Jr. v. United States of America, Arthur J. Fulcher, Jr. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1982
  2. Price v. Tomrich CorporationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
  3. Perpignani v. VonasekWisconsin Supreme Court · 1987
  4. McManus v. KluttzCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004
  5. Bowers v. MitchellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962

3 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