Quelch v. . Futch
Supreme Court of North Carolina
AotioN to recover ai tract of land, tried at April Term, 1916, of New HaNoveR, before Peebles, J. Upon an intimation from the court that he would charge the jury that a certain deed did not convey the land described in complaint, plaintiff submitted to a nonsuit and appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtBeowN, J.
Plaintiffs claim title under deed in fee in due form, dated 14 May, 1889, executed by D. T. Cronly to John B. Quelch. After the premises of the deed, which is in the usual form of a bargain and sale, follows a specific description of the tract of land as follows: “Beginning on the east side of the W. and W. railroad at a culvert”; then follows a description by metes and bounds.
Then the habendum and tenendum, in the usual form, to John B. Quelch and his heirs; then follows the usual covenant of warranty. Immediately following that the deed contains this general description of the land:
“The…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Triplett v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
- Rutherford v. TracySupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
- Den on Dem. of Everitt v. ThomasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1840
- Brown v. . RickardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- Prentice v. Northern Pac. R.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota · 1890
3Cited by24 opinions
- State v. . SatterfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
- State v. . GibsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Crews v. CrewsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Quelch v. . FutchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
- Skipper v. YowSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.