Legal Opinion

Guy v. First Carolinas Joint Stock Land Bank of Columbia

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 1, 1933PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

The plaintiff first sued for breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment, but as he was not able, or failed, to allege eviction under paramount title, ouster or adverse claim, his complaint was held demurrable. Guy v. Bank, 202 N. C., 803, 164 S. E., 323.

The present action is for alleged breach of covenant of seizin, but as the deed under which plaintiff acquired title contains no covenant of seizin (Cover v. McAden, 183 N. C., 641, 112 S. E., 817, Price v. Deal, 90 N. C., 290), the judgment of nonsuit was properly entered. It is the rule with us that there are no implied covenants with respect…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Phillips Walsh v. . Rufus D. HallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1872
  2. May v. . LoomisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  3. Price v. . DealSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
  4. Smathers v. . GilmerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1900
  5. Cover v. . McAdenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Brooks v. Ervin Construction CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  2. City of Wilmington v. MerrickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  3. Queen v. SiskSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  4. Turpin v. County of JacksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945

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

Powered by the Exa API