Layden v. . Layden
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtDenny, J.
Tbe plaintiffs and tbe defendants are claiming title from a common source. Tbe plaintiffs having introduced evidence tending to show title in themselves, and having offered evidence tending to show that tbe purported deed to tbe locus in quo, held by tbe defendants, is void, they were entitled to go to tbe jury on tbe issues raised by tbe pleadings. Hence, tbe judgment as of nonsuit was erroneously entered.
Tbe defendants’ sole claim of title to tbe lands involved herein is based on tbe following grounds: (1) R. T. Layden was in possession of tbe premises for more than ten years prior to tbe…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hall v. ArnottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Mascarel v. RaffourCalifornia Supreme Court · 1876
- Commercial Bank v. KershnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Irons v. American National BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1933
- Berry v. . CoppersmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Barbee v. EdwardsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- Grady v. ParkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
- Sanders v. HamiltonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- Pownal Development Corp. v. Pownal Tanning Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2000
- DeBruhl v. L. Harvey & Son Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.