Carroll v. . Batson
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBbogdeN, J.
What interest does the grantee of land have in timber reserved therefrom in the deed of the grantor ?
This question was considered by the Court in Mining Co. v. Cotton Mills, 143 N. C., 307, 55 S. E., 700. The law is thus stated whore the, land was conveyed in fee with an exception or reservation of the timber: “In such case, if a time or event is specified upon which the timber must be cut, the reservation expires upon the happening of the. event or expiration of the time. . . . Whether the right to cut timber is a grant, or a reservation, it expires at the time specified. When no time is…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Bateman v. Kramer Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
- Hornthal v. . HowcottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
- Mining Co. v. . Cotton MillsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- Kelly v. Enterprise Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
- Bank of Onslow v. Rowland Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Hardison v. LilleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- Layman v. LedgettWashington Supreme Court · 1978
- Goin v. AbsherSupreme Court of Virginia · 1949
- Layman v. LedgettWashington Supreme Court · 1978