Thomas v. . Garvin
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was a petition for partition, to which the defendant pleaded : 1st. That site was not tenant in common with the petitioners, 2dly. That site was not tenant in common in possession wTith petitioners. 3dly. That she was in the sole adverse possession of the premises. To these pleas replications were entered.
Read the full summary
This was a petition for partition, to which the defendant pleaded : 1st. That site was not tenant in common with the petitioners, 2dly. That site was not tenant in common in possession wTith petitioners. 3dly. That she was in the sole adverse possession of the premises. To these pleas replications were entered. The petition was filed Fall term 1828, of Bladen Superior Court, by Sarah Mulford, who died pending tiie suit, and the present petitioners were made parties with leave to prosecute.— On the trial before Dasiiex, Judge, at Spring term, 1831, the defendant produced a conveyance from…
1Opinion of the Court
Gaston, Judge.
A proceeding for partition at law, cannot take place except there be a common possession, ami a common possession is always implied from a common title until the contrary be shown. But if an actual ouster be made by one tenant in common with his co-tenant, there is no longer a common possession, and the remedy is not by petition for partition, but by ejectment to recover possession of the individual moiety.--» The sole enjoyment of the property by one of the tenants is not of itself, an ouster, for his possession will be understood to be in conformity with right, and the…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Dobbins v. Dobbins.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- Alexander v. . GibbonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
- Rhea v. Craig.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- Russell v. StickneySupreme Court of Florida · 1911
- Sheets v. SheetsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.