Legal Opinion

Bryan v. Washington Spivey

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 15, 1890Published

This was an acticw heard before Boykin, J., at Fall Term, 1889, of Ceaven Superior Court, upon a motion by the defendants, upon the pleadings and the affidavit, a copy of which is hereto annexed, for a severance and separate trial of said action against each defendant.

Read the full summary

This was an acticw heard before Boykin, J., at Fall Term, 1889, of Ceaven Superior Court, upon a motion by the defendants, upon the pleadings and the affidavit, a copy of which is hereto annexed, for a severance and separate trial of said action against each defendant. His Honor held that, as a matter of right, and as the only way in which the case could be tried to do full justice between the parties, the defendants were entitled to a severance and separate trial, and so ordered. The plaintiffs excepted and appealed. It was agreed that no exception should be taken to said appeal at this…

1Opinion of the CourtAvery, J.

after stating the facts: In actions to recover land it is sufficient if the complaint distinctly describe a tract of land and allege that the defendant is in possession of some part of it. Speight v. Jenkins, 99 N. C., 143. It is a well established rule that a number of trespassers, who have settled upon different parts of one tract of land, or upon several, that are contiguous and have been consolidated by the owner of them into one body, may be sued in a single suit brought by the latter to recover possession and have the title adjudicated. Thames v. Jones, 97 N. C., 121; Love v. Wilbourn,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Thames v. . JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
  2. Fitzgerald v. . SheltonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
  3. Speight v. . JenkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API