Lee v. Montague
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Civil actioN, tried before Bond, J., at October Term, 1916, of Wake. This is .an action to recover the value of an alleged shortage of 81 acres of land in a voluntary partition between the plaintiff and the defendant as tenants in common, tried on the following agreed statement facts: The mother of the plaintiff and the feme defendant owned the land at the time of her death. She devised it to the plaintiff and the feme defendant, to be equally divided between them.
Read the full summary
Civil actioN, tried before Bond, J., at October Term, 1916, of Wake. This is .an action to recover the value of an alleged shortage of 81 acres of land in a voluntary partition between the plaintiff and the defendant as tenants in common, tried on the following agreed statement facts: The mother of the plaintiff and the feme defendant owned the land at the time of her death. She devised it to the plaintiff and the feme defendant, to be equally divided between them. In 1907, December 18th, the plaintiff executed a deed to the feme defendant, and the feme defendant and her husband executed to…
1Opinion of the CourtAi.len, J.
The plaintiff and the defendant were tenants in common of the land devised to them by their mother, and equality of division and partition could only be had upon the basis of the value of the land and not of the number of .acres. Revisal, sec. 2491; Sanderson v. Bigham, 40 S. C., 501 Howard v. Howard, 19 Conn., 317.
It follows, therefore, that there is no error in the judgment pronounced as there is neither allegation nor proof that the land conveyed to the plaintiff by the defendant is not equal in value to the land conveyed to the defendant.
The authorities relied on by the plaintiff are not…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Plummer v. PlummerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1954