Legal Opinion

Springs v. . Schenck

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 5, 1890Published

1Opinion of the Court

The action was brought to recover possession of the land described in the complaint. When the case was called for trial, the plaintiff announced that he was not ready to try, because of the absence of one T. J. Orr, a surveyor, by whom he expected to prove that the land described in the complaint was covered by the deeds from Phelps to Rothchilds, and from Rothchilds to the plaintiff, hereinafter referred to. The defendants' counsel replied that defendants wished to try, and would admit what plaintiff stated he expected to prove by the witness Orr, and defendants did admit that the said deeds…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Williams v. . ClouseSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
  2. Temple v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
  3. Reeves v. . DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879
  4. Cobb v. . FountainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  5. Jones v. . HenrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1881

2 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