Legal Opinion · Dissent

Rutherford v. . Ray

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 1, 1908PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1DissentClark, C.J.

This action is prosecuted by the feme plaintiff for the purpose of quieting and removing a cloud from the title to her separate real estate. The undisputed facts as disclosed by the record are: The feme plaintiff was, on 21 February, 1895, the owner of the real estate described in the complaint, being a lot in the city of Fayetteville. The deed under which she claims recites a consideration of $150. On the said day Poe Co. filed in the office of the clerk of the Superior Court of Cumberland County an itemized account reciting that "Mr. L. A. Rutherford bought of Poe Co." certain brick, the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Doyle v. . Brown, GuardianSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1875
  2. Neville v. . PopeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
  3. Whitehurst v. Merchants & Farmers Transportation Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  4. Smaw v. . CohenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
  5. Busbee v. . LewisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1881

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Powell v. . TurpinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
  2. Brooks v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1987
  3. Brooks v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1987

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API