Sheppard v. . Simpson
Supreme Court of North Carolina
From Pitt. Petition for partition, to which the Defendant plead that “ he was not tenant in common with the demandant.” On the trial of this issue the jury returned a special verdict. the material facts of which, were as follows: The laud in question belonged to one Jemima Smith, who conveyed it in fee, to her son Charles.
Read the full summary
From Pitt. Petition for partition, to which the Defendant plead that “ he was not tenant in common with the demandant.” On the trial of this issue the jury returned a special verdict. the material facts of which, were as follows: The laud in question belonged to one Jemima Smith, who conveyed it in fee, to her son Charles. David Smith, the husband of Jemima and the father of Charles, by his will devised the same land to his wife for life, with a remainder in fee, to his sons Charles and John. Before the executions and the sale, hereafter mentioned, John Smith, the devisee (if David, died…
1Opinion of the Court
Upon these facts, his Honor, Judge Paxton, on the Spring Circuit of 1826, thinking that the purchaser at sheriff's sale took only one-half and one-eleventh of one-half of the land, decided that the parties were tenants in common in the proportion of five-elevenths to the demandant and six-elevenths to the defendant, and awarded a writ of partition; on the return of this writ at the next term, before his Honor, Judge Mangum, a judgment of confirmation was entered, whereupon the defendant appealed. The question in controversy is what land was actually conveyed by the sheriff's deed to David…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Murphy v. Murphy.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
- Babb v. Gay Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1909