Legal Opinion

Carswell v. . Creswell

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 2, 1940PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClarkson, J.

The only exception and assignment of error made by defendants is to the order of the court below overruling the defendants’ demurrer. We think the ruling of the court below correct.

The plaintiff states two main contentions why the demurrer should have been overruled. As one is sufficient to determine this cause, we do not consider the other: The plaintiff contends that he has been in possession and held the property in controversy adversely for thirteen years next preceding tbe commencement of this action, under known and visible lines and boundaries and colorable title, by virtue of a valid…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Locklear v. . SavageSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
  2. Moose v. . CarsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
  3. Hoadley v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
  4. Cameron v. Hicks.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  5. People v. PopeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1879

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. English v. Holden Beach Realty Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
  2. Hughes v. OliverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  3. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. v. Pan American Airways, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1939
  4. Johnson v. WagnerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  5. Johnson v. . WagnerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941

6 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