Legal Opinion

Britton v. . Ruffin

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 5, 1897PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Civil actioN, for damages arising from an alleged breach of warranty of title, tried before Robinson, J., and a jury, at September Term, 1896, of Beiitie Superior Court. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court. There was judgment for the plaintiff and defendant appealed, assigning as error the refusal to give the instruction referred to in the opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Faiboloth, C. J.:

The defendant's intestate in consideration of $450, by deed, sold to plaintiffs “all of the cypress timber on Ahoshie-and Loosing Swamps,” * * * “except enough for his farming and building purposes,” and warranted the title. The plaintiffs cut trees for two or three years, and voluntarily quit. The deed under which defendant, Ruffin, claimed title, was held to be void for uncertainty in the description. Mizell v. Ruffin, 113 N. C., 21. Plaintiffs entered in 1874 and cut trees 2 or 3 years, and after 1890 attempted to resume cutting, when subsequent purchasers from defendant’s…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Mizell v. . RuffinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Wilson v. . VreelandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918

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

Powered by the Exa API