Legal Opinion

Perry v. . Hackney

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 23, 1906PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The feme plaintiff sued to recover a tract of land, and her husband was joined with her pro forma, there being no allegation in the complaint of his title or right of possession. The sole allegation was that the wife owned the land and was entitled to the possession thereof, and the prayer was that she be declared to be the owner and that she recover the possession. It is presumed, of course, that the case was tried upon the only issue raised by the pleadings, the issue upon which it actually was tried not being set out in the record. It was admitted that Stepheness Chambless owned the land,…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Wool v. Fleetwood.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
  2. Condry v. . CheshireSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1883
  3. May v. Lewis.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
  4. Leathers v. . GraySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888
  5. Murray, Ferris & Co. v. BlackledgeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Bowden v. BowdenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  2. Miller v. Citizens Nat. Bank, CovingtonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1950
  3. Barnes v. . AycockSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  4. Gaskins v. . SidburySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
  5. Mangum v. WilsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952

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