Lawrence v. Heavner
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtEevin, J.
If plaintiff and defendant had actually been married, they would have taken title to the property as tenants by the entireties in conformity with the manifest intention of the parties to the deed. Winchester-Simmons Co. v. Cutler, 199 N.C. 709, 155 S.E. 611. But since they were not in fact husband and wife, the conveyance to them made them tenants in common. Texido v. Merical, 230 N.Y.S. 605, 132 Misc. 764. Nothing else appearing, the interests of plaintiff and defendant in the property are equal, and plaintiff is entitled to have the defendant account to her for one-half of the net rents…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Avery v. StewartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Avery v. . StewartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- America Potato Co. v. Jeanette Bros.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
- Burton v. Life & Casualty InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- Jolly v. . BryanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Mims v. MimsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
- Wells v. ClaytonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
- Huss v. HussCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976
- Waddell v. CarsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Wright v. WrightSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.