Hoilman v. . Johnson
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by plaintiff from Gline, J., at July-Term, 1913, of • Mitchell. Civil action, tried upon this issue: “Are the plaintiffs the owners and entitled to the possession of the mineral interests in the lands described in the complaint ? Answer: No.” The plaintiffs appealed from the judgment rendered.
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
This action, as the issue indicates, is brought to recover the mineral interests in a certain tract of land which formerly belonged to Simeon Slagle. The plaintiff introduced a connected chain of deeds for the mineral interests from Slagle to the plaintiffs, antedating the deed of-the defendant.
The defendant claimed title to the entire fee, including the mineral interests, by deed from Simeon Slagle to the defendant, dated 29 January, 1903.
It is -admitted that the defendant owns the surface, and to show title to the mineral interests, the defendant relies on his deed as color of title, and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Outlaw v. . GraySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
3Cited by14 opinions
- Builders Supplies Co. of Goldsboro, NC, Inc. v. GaineySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- Vance v. . GuySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
- Davison v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1920
- Vance v. . PritchardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
- Davis v. Federal Land BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.