Borders v. Yarbrough
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtPakkeb, J.
The appellant in her brief makes only these contentions: First, that the description of an easement in the deed is too uncertain, vague and indefinite to permit identification with reasonable certainty of an easement; that the claimed easement is not apparent; and that the plaintiff does not allege in her complaint that her right to run a sewer line across defendant’s lot is a way of necessity.
An easement is an interest in land, and is generally created by deed. Mordecai Law Lectures, Vol. 1, p. 464; Norfleet v. Cromwell, 64 N.C. 1; Thompson v. Umberger, 221 N.C. 178, 19 S.E. 2d 484. G.S.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Thompson v. . UmbergerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Burgas v. StoutzSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1932
- Walker v. PhelpsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
- McCormick v. . MonroeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1853
- Walker v. . PhelpsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Weyerhaeuser Company v. Carolina Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- North Carolina State Highway Commission v. NucklesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
- Hensley v. RamseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
- Builders Supplies Co. of Goldsboro, NC, Inc. v. GaineySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- Reed v. ElmoreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.