Bridgers v. . Ormond
Supreme Court of North Carolina
AotxoN heard before Cooke, at June Term, 1908, of Edgecombe, to recover possession of a deed, alleged to be in the possession of the defendants. Ref ore answering, the defendants applied for Removal to the county of Greene. From the order removing the cause the plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtBeown, J.
It does not appear that the ancillary or provisional remedy of claim and delivery has been resorted to in this action, and in order to maintain an action for the recovery of personal property it is not essential that it should be. The áction may proceed to trial and the title to personal property be determined without resorting to the provisional remedy.
The complaint discloses that the purpose of the action is to' recover possession of a deed that has never been in possession of the plaintiff. The deed was deposited in escrow, to be delivered upon the performance of a contract entered into by…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Flannigan v. GogginsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1888
- Pasterfield v. Sawyer.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
- Hooker v. . LathamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
- Pasterfield v. Sawyer.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
3Cited by7 opinions
- Councill v. . BaileySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
- Dobbs v. First National Bank of AtlantaCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1941
- Wofford-Fain & Co. v. HamptonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
- Vaughan v. . FallinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
- Holder v. Volusia County Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1928
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.