Legal Opinion

Paul v. . Carpenter

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 5, 1874Published

1Opinion of the Court

BYNUM, J. dissents. The substantial facts as agreed, are:

The premises, the subject of the controversy, prior to the 17th February, 1864, was the separate property of Hetty, the then wife of A. H. Curtis, since dead, and who since his death has intermarried with the defendant, D.C. Carpenter. On the 17th of February, 1864, Curtis and wife sold the land for a full and fair price, to one Benjamin Jacobs, from whom, through a regular series of conveyances, the plaintiff herein claims. The only question arising, being as to the sufficiency in law of the private examination of the feme grantor.

No…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Jones v. . CohenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1880
  2. Harrell, Administrator C. v. . Watson and OthersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1869
  3. Attorney General Ex Rel. Gillaspie v. Justices of Guilford CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1844
  4. State Ex Rel. McCubbins v. BarringerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1868
  5. Dunn, Ex ParteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1869

10 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