Legal Opinion · Dissent

Rowe v. Walker

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided March 15, 1994No. 929SC918Published

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

  1. Finley v. Glenn Et Ux.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  2. Morehead v. HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  3. Reed v. ElmoreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  4. Hill v. Pinelawn Memorial Park, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  5. Green v. MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912

10 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