Legal Opinion

Sheppard v. . Simpson

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided July 5, 1827Published

From Pitt. Petition for partition, to which the Defendant plead that “ he was not tenant in common with the demandant.” On the trial of this issue the jury returned a special verdict. the material facts of which, were as follows: The laud in question belonged to one Jemima Smith, who conveyed it in fee, to her son Charles.

Read the full summary

From Pitt. Petition for partition, to which the Defendant plead that “ he was not tenant in common with the demandant.” On the trial of this issue the jury returned a special verdict. the material facts of which, were as follows: The laud in question belonged to one Jemima Smith, who conveyed it in fee, to her son Charles. David Smith, the husband of Jemima and the father of Charles, by his will devised the same land to his wife for life, with a remainder in fee, to his sons Charles and John. Before the executions and the sale, hereafter mentioned, John Smith, the devisee (if David, died…

1Opinion

If I understand the argument of the defendant, it is that the reference made in the sheriff's deed to the will of David Smith, describing the land sold, should be rejected, as repugnant to other descriptions which are sufficient to identify and locate it, which, being more certain, should control, and if necessary correct that contained in the reference. The description contained in the sheriff's deed is "a tract of land lying in the county of Pitt, on the south side of Tar River, and on both sides of Hardie's Run, being the lands devised to Charles Smith by his father, David Smith, and the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Murphy v. Murphy.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
  2. Knight v. . LeakSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1836

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API