Legal Opinion

Chappell v. Donnelly

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 15, 1994No. 929SC808PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JOHN, Judge.

In this action, plaintiffs seek to establish the boundary lines between two contiguous parcels of land owned respectively by plaintiffs and defendants. They contend the court below erred by granting defendants’ motion at trial for a directed verdict. We disagree.

The pleadings and evidence before the trial court tend to show plaintiffs and defendants are the record owners of two adjacent plots of land located in Granville County. According to the parties’ respective deeds, plaintiffs’ tract contains 73.41 acres, while defendants’ measures 1.571 acres. As the result of a controversy…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Mobley v. . GriffinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
  2. Virginia Electric & Power Co. v. TillettCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
  3. Watts v. Cumberland County Hospital System, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
  4. Watts v. Cumberland County Hospital System, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  5. Andrews v. BrutonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Porter v. SchafferCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1999
  2. Dowley v. MorencySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1999
  3. Merrick v. PetersonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
  4. Markley v. SemleSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1998
  5. Haw River Land & Timber Company, Incorporated George W. Riddle v. Lawyers Title Insurance CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1998

15 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