Young v. . Griffith
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Civil Actior to recover Possession of Land, commenced in Buncombe and removed to and tried at Fall Term, 1876, of Madison Superior Court, before Henry, J. The facts embodied in the opinion of this Court by Mr. Justice Rodman are deemed sufficient to present the points decided. See same case, 71 N. C., 335. Verdict and judgment for plaintiffs. Appeal by defendants.
1Opinion of the CourtRodmaN, J.
On. the 13th of October, 1841, Robert Love ■and James R. Love were seized in fee of a large body of land in Buncombe and other counties, and agreed in writing with Wesley Young (whom the plaintiffs represent) to sell and convey a certain piece of land at fifty cents per acre to be paid in hogs at or about Christmas, in 1842. The boundaries of the land to be conveyed appear on the face of the agreement to be indefinite, although perhaps "they may be shown to be certain by a survey. The number of acres included in the boundaries given was evidently unknown to the parties, and it must have been…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Doe Ex Dem. Gaither v. GibsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1869
3Cited by4 opinions
- Ocean Hill Joint Venture v. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health & Natural ResourcesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1993
- Young v. . GriffithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1881
- Johnson v. HunnicuttCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- Ocean Hill Joint Venture v. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health & Natural ResourcesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1993