Hildebrand MacHinery Co. v. Post
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtCoNnoe, J.
Under and by virtue of its deed from W. C. Ervin and wife dated 15 September, 1932, the plaintiff is now the owner of the parcel of land and of the buildings described in its complaint, subject,' however, to the rights of the defendants under and by virtue of the lease to them executed by O. E. Kistler, agent for W. C. Ervin, and dated 15 July, 1931. The fact that the lease, although for a term of more than three years, was not recorded at the date of the deed to the jffaintiff (C. S., 3309) is immaterial. The land and the buildings described in the deed were conveyed to the plaintiff subject…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Benton v. Montgomery Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
- Hardy v. . FryerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
- Newbern Banking & Trust Co. v. DuffySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
- Robertson v. . RobertsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- Texas Co. v. Beaufort Oil & Fuel Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
3Cited by1 opinion
- State Trust Co. v. BraznellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947