Seawell v. Seawell
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBaeNhill, J.
A tenant in common is entitled, as a matter of right, to a partition of the land to the end that he may have and enjoy his share therein in severalty, unless it is made to appear that an actual partition cannot be had without injury to some or all of the interested parties. G.S. 46-22; Hyman v. Edwards, 217 N.C. 342, 7 S.E. 2d 700; Talley v. Murchison, 212 N.C. 205, 193 S.E. 148; Foster v. Williams, 182 N.C. 632, 109 S.E. 834.
The burden is on him who seeks a sale in lieu of actual partition to allege and prove the fact upon which the order of sale must rest under the terms of G.S. 46-22,…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Elmore v. AustinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
- Smith Ex Rel. Smith v. MearsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Chas. W. Priddy & Co. v. SanderfordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Foster v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
- Wachovia Bank & Trust Co. v. MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Little v. Wachovia Bank and Trust CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
- Woodard v. ClarkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- Wachovia Bank & Trust Co. v. SchneiderSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
- Entwistle v. CovingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
- Brown v. BogerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.