Rowe v. Walker
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Dissent
Judge John
dissenting.
I believe the trial court correctly concluded that plaintiffs, as a result of recordation of the easement in Orange County, were chargeable with constructive notice of the existence and entire course of that easement. In addition, contrary to the majority’s assertion, I also believe our law requires that “purchasers for value,” in order to claim protection under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 47-27 (1984), must indeed be “innocent.” See Hill v. Memorial Park, 304 N.C. 159, 165, 282 S.E.2d 779, 783 (1981) (N.C. recording statutes “do[] not protect all purchasers, but only innocent…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Finley v. Glenn Et Ux.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Morehead v. HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- Reed v. ElmoreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Hill v. Pinelawn Memorial Park, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
- Green v. MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.