Ray v. . Thornton
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was an appeal from the appraisers allotting a homestead, taken under §520 of The Code, tried at the Spring-Term, 1885, of the Superior Court of Cumberland county, before Avery, Judge. The sheriff of Cumberland county had in his hands two executions, one in favor of the People’s National Bank, to the use of N. W. Ray, and the other in favor of A. A. McKethan and others, both against A. G. Thornton.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from the appraisers allotting a homestead, taken under §520 of The Code, tried at the Spring-Term, 1885, of the Superior Court of Cumberland county, before Avery, Judge. The sheriff of Cumberland county had in his hands two executions, one in favor of the People’s National Bank, to the use of N. W. Ray, and the other in favor of A. A. McKethan and others, both against A. G. Thornton. The sheriff appointed appraisers to lay off and assign to A. G. Thornton his homestead and personal property exemption. He owned a lot in the town of Fayetteville on which he resided,…
1Opinion of the Court
Ashe, J.,
(after stating the facts). The objection made by defendant that the homestead was not laid off by metes and bounds, we do not think is sustainable. The act does require that the homestead shall be laid off by metes and bounds, but metes and bounds do not mean that it shall be laid off by course and distance. The metes and bounds of a tract of land may be designated by the course of a stream, the line of another tract, by a wall, and even by a fence, and if the fence should be moved it would be competent to prove where it had stood. We think the boundaries of the homestead stated in…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Kelly v. . McLeodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Thornton v. VanstorySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- Thornton v. . VanstorySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890