Legal Opinion

Lane v. . Davis

Superior Court of North Carolina

Decided April 5, 1796PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

At this term it was argued by Mr. Hamilton that the Legislature of North Carolina had no power to pass any law having a retrospective view. The Bill of Rights, which is a part of our Constitution, section 24, expressly negatives the power of passing ex post facto laws. The act in question not only forbids the making estates tail after the passing the act, but also attempts to bar and do away all such entails in remainder as existed and had been legally created before the passing of it. Article 43 of the Constitution enables the future Legislature to regulate entails in such manner as to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Springs v. ScottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
  2. Anderson v. WilkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  3. Holliday v. McMillanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1878
  4. Richardson v. RichardsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Springs v. ScottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
  2. Anderson v. WilkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  3. Anderson v. . WilkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  4. Richardson v. RichardsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
  5. Richardson v. . RichardsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909

1 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