Staley v. . Staley
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by defendants from Qline, J., at July Term, 1917, of RaN-dolph. Tbis was a proceeding under the Processioning Act (Revisal, 326), begun before tbe Clerk of the Superior Court of Randolph. The petition alleges that the plaintiff is the owner of a tract of land containing 69-acres, fully describing the same by metes and bounds. On a survey, ordered by the court, it appears to contain 73 acres.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendants from Qline, J., at July Term, 1917, of RaN-dolph. Tbis was a proceeding under the Processioning Act (Revisal, 326), begun before tbe Clerk of the Superior Court of Randolph. The petition alleges that the plaintiff is the owner of a tract of land containing 69-acres, fully describing the same by metes and bounds. On a survey, ordered by the court, it appears to contain 73 acres. The defendants-denied that the petitioner was the owner of said land, and the clerk transferred said case to the trial docket of the Superior Court at term, because the title was put in issue. The…
1Opinion of the CourtClark, C. J.
The only question presented is the judgment against the defendants for costs. Paragraph 1 of the complaint- alleged that the plaintiff was the owner of a tract of land set out by metes and bounds. To this the answer averred that the defendants “have not sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief, and therefore deny the same.” Revisal, 479 (1). There were other allegations in the complaint as to boundaries, which were also denied. Upon the issues thus raised, the case was transferred to the term of the Superior Court for trial without exception. The judge made an order, “It appearing…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Cureton v. . GarrisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
- Moore v. Guano Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
3Cited by1 opinion
- In Re Entry of HurleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923