Baldwin v. Hinton
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBobbitt, J.
While nominally a cause of action to remove a cloud from plaintiffs’ title, this is essentially an action in ejectment. True, possession by plaintiffs is not a prerequisite to an action brought under G.S. 41-10. Satterwhite v. Gallagher, 173 N.C. 525, 92 S.E. 369; Vick v. Winslow, 209 N.C. 540, 183 S.E. 750. Nor is it necessary in such an action to allege or establish either trespass or unlawful possession by defendants. But where, as here, defendants are in actual possession, and plaintiffs seek to recover possession, the action in essence is in ejectment. Hines v. Moye, 125 N.C. 8, 34 S.E.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Wells v. ClaytonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
- North Carolina Self Help Corp. v. BrinkleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- Garrett v. RoseSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
- Deans v. DeansSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- Hodges v. . StewartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Lane v. CoeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- Hayes v. RicardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
- Builders Supplies Co. of Goldsboro, NC, Inc. v. GaineySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- McDaris v. Breit Bar" T" CorporationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- State v. BrooksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.