Doe on the Demise of Foust v. Trice
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Ejectment, tried before Bailey, J., at the Fall Term, 1861, of Orange Superior Court. The case was called on Thursday of the term, when the defendant alleged he was not ready for trial, and prayed a continuance, 1st, for the absence of James Pender, the occupant of the land, in dispute, who was detained from Court by sickness ; that he expected to prove by Pender that he never was the tenant of Foust, the lessor of plaintiff, but was in fact and in truth the tenant of the…
Read the full summary
Ejectment, tried before Bailey, J., at the Fall Term, 1861, of Orange Superior Court. The case was called on Thursday of the term, when the defendant alleged he was not ready for trial, and prayed a continuance, 1st, for the absence of James Pender, the occupant of the land, in dispute, who was detained from Court by sickness ; that he expected to prove by Pender that he never was the tenant of Foust, the lessor of plaintiff, but was in fact and in truth the tenant of the defendants; that he was carried on the land, by the force and fraud of one Hugh Kirkpatrick, and that being there, he…
1Opinion of the CourtManly, J.
Kirkpatrick, at the beginningof the year 1854, entered on the land as the tenant of Foust, under an agreement that he was to hold,: for an indefinite time, the whole tract, paying as rent a part of the crop of each year, made on the cleared land, and was to have any land that he should clear, rent free, for two years. This certainly made Kirkpatrick* a tenant from year to year. He afterwards put Pender in possession of a part of the wood-land under an agreement that he might stay there as long as Kirkpatrick 'had any. interest in the land. Pender built a cabin and cleared a small patch and…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Farley v. . LeaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1838
- Belfour and Henly Heirs v. . Davis and NixonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1838