Pool v. . Anderson
Supreme Court of North Carolina
ActioN tried before Adams, J., and a jury, at January Term, • 1909, of McDowell.^ Action for recovery of land. Plaintiffs claim under John E. Gray, wbo, on 12 March, 1819, executed a bond obligating himself to make title to S. N. Stockton upon tbe payment of $300, “as stipulated by note or otherwise.” Tbe signature to tbe bond was attested by H. W. Wise.
Read the full summary
ActioN tried before Adams, J., and a jury, at January Term, • 1909, of McDowell.^ Action for recovery of land. Plaintiffs claim under John E. Gray, wbo, on 12 March, 1819, executed a bond obligating himself to make title to S. N. Stockton upon tbe payment of $300, “as stipulated by note or otherwise.” Tbe signature to tbe bond was attested by H. W. Wise. Stockton went into possession of tbe land upon tbe execution of tbe bond, and remained thereon until his death, devising it to tbe feme defendant, Cordelia Anderson, wbo has been in possession at all times since tbe death of said Stockton.…
1Opinion of the CourtConnor, J.
Conceding that, notwithstanding the fact that Stockton, and those claiming under him, Have been in possession of the land since the execution of the bond for title, the burden of proof to' show that the purchase money had been paid was on defendant, we think that his Honor correctly held that the note was competent evidence to be considered by the jury upon that issue. Plaintiffs’ counsel strongly urges that there is no evidence connecting the note with the bond for title. We think that there is evidence tending to show that it was given in part payment of the purchase money for the land. In…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Godfrey v. . Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- Godfrey v. Western Carolina Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- Mayo v. . MartinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923