McCracken v. Clark
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.
Tbe trial court erred in directing tbe verdict on tbe second issue. On that issue, tbe burden of proof was upon tbe defendants. This being so, they were not entitled to a directed instruction.
To establish tbe easement claimed by tbe defendants tbe burden of proof was upon tbem to satisfy tbe jury by tbe greater weight of tbe evidence that tbe user relied on was hostile in character, rather than permissive and with tbe owners’ consent. McPherson v. Williams, 205 N.C. 177, 170 S.E. 662; Chesson v. Jordan, 224 N.C. 289, p. 292, 29 S.E. 2d 906. “Permissive use is presumed until tbe contrary is…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Chesson v. . JordanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
- Speight v. . AndersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
- Carmon v. . DickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
- Ferrell v. Durham Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Haywood v. Home Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Cutts v. CaseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- Peek v. Wachovia Bank & Trust CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- Broyhill v. CoppageCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- Nicholas v. Salisbury Hardware and Furniture Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
- Smith v. MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.