Basnight v. Smith
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was a orvir, ACTION, tried before Hoke, J., and a jury, at Fall Term, 1892', of Dare Superior Court. The purpose of the action was to compel the Sheriff of Dare county to execute to plaintiff a deed for the two tracts of land set out and described in the complaint, and known as the Charles Horton tract and the Hooker tract; said land having been sold by the said Sheriff for taxes on May 5, 1890, and purchased by plaintiff.
Read the full summary
This was a orvir, ACTION, tried before Hoke, J., and a jury, at Fall Term, 1892', of Dare Superior Court. The purpose of the action was to compel the Sheriff of Dare county to execute to plaintiff a deed for the two tracts of land set out and described in the complaint, and known as the Charles Horton tract and the Hooker tract; said land having been sold by the said Sheriff for taxes on May 5, 1890, and purchased by plaintiff. The plaintiff proved the sale by the Sheriff on May 5, 1890, for taxes due from Charles Horton and J. Hooker. That plaintiff bought at said sale and took a certificate…
1Opinion of the Court
Clark, J.:
The principal point in this case is decided in Manufacturing Co. v. Frey, at this Term. It is there held that where a patent issued for a tract of land reserving land within its limits “ previously granted,” that possession under such patent, but outside of the land “previously granted,” was not constructive possession of the excepted land, and that the patent was not color of title to the land so excepted, though the burden was on the party claiming under the exception to show that the land in question came within the exception. Here that has been done.
The defendant in this case,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Fox v. . StaffordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
3Cited by3 opinions
- Taylor v. JohnstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
- West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co. v. Richmond Cedar WorksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- Collins v. PettittSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1899