Gaskins v. . Sidbury

It appears tbat tbe plaintiffs bave misconceived their rights and remedies.

It will not do to say tbe feme plaintiff may waive tbe fraud and recover tbe value of tbe land which tbe defendant sought by alteration to include in tbe deed, and at tbe same time recover damages for tbe fraud. No deed has been executed by ber for tbe balance of ber land and she still has title thereto. Perry v. Hackney, 142 N. C., 368, 55 S. E., 289; 16 Am. Jur., 643. Indeed, she may bave seizin and legal title to all tbe land described in tbe paper-writing. Respass v. Jones, 102 N. C., 5, 8 S. E., 770.

What tbe feme…