Legal Opinion

Overton v. Boyce

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 29, 1976No. 104PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LAKE, Justice.

A deed purporting to convey an interest in land is void unless it contains a description of the land sufficient to identify it or refers to something extrinsic by which the land may be identified with certainty. State v. Brooks, 279 N.C. 45, 181 S.E. 2d 553; Carlton v. Anderson, 276 N.C. 564, 173 S.E. 2d 783; Lane v. Coe, 262 N.C. 8, 136 S.E. 2d 269; Deans v. Deans, 241 N.C. 1, 84 S.E. 2d 321; Searcy v. Logan, 226 N.C. 562, 39 S.E. 2d 593; Strong, N. C. Index 2d, Boundaries, § 10. When the deed itself, including the references to extrinsic things, describes with certainty the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. North Carolina Self Help Corp. v. BrinkleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  2. Lane v. CoeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  3. Thompson v. . UmbergerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  4. McDaris v. Breit Bar" T" CorporationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  5. Cummings v. Dosam, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1968

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Brooks v. HackneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
  2. Maurice v. Hatterasman Motel Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
  3. Foreman v. ShollCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
  4. In Re Law Developers, LLCUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2008
  5. Garrison v. BlakeneyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978

15 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