Legal Opinion

Peel v. . Calais

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 20, 1944PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBabNiiill, J.

The particular description in the Samuel Peel deed, as it relates to the land in controversy, is patently defective. Peel v. Calais, 223 N. C., 368. There are two lines which may be fitted to the land in controversy but there is no attempt to close the calls so as to embrace the same. The defendants must resort to the general description “a certain tract of land in Beaufort County, N. 0., adjoining the land of John Peel, Griffin and others.” Hence the exceptions entered by plaintiffs and presented on this appeal challenge the sufficiency of the evidence aliunde to support the verdict on the…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. North Carolina Self Help Corp. v. BrinkleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  2. Lewis v. . MurraySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
  3. Perry v. . ScottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  4. Euliss v. . McAdamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  5. Stewart v. . CarySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Troitino v. GoodmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  2. Hayes v. RicardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  3. Duckett v. HarrisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  4. Mallet v. HuskeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  5. Holloman v. DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953

8 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