Legal Opinion

Shuford v. Phillips

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 9, 1952No. 312PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBabNhill, J.

In his brief the defendant bottoms his attack on the sufficiency of the complaint to state a cause of action on two grounds : (1) “The complaint fails to allege that plaintiff went into possession, or that he was evicted, ousted, or disturbed in his possession by one having paramount title at the time of the conveyance to plaintiff;” and (2) “Plaintiff, in his pleading, admits the deed upon which J. I. Hickman bases his title is void. It is not, therefore, paramount title.” The contentions thus advanced are untenable.

Plaintiff pleads (1) the deed of conveyance for the locus executed and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Culbreth v. Britt Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  2. Mizzell v. . RuffinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
  3. Bowling v. . BurtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888
  4. Cover v. . McAdenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  5. Lockhart v. . ParkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Pratt v. BishopSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  2. Little v. RoseSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  3. Brewster v. HinesWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Brewster v. HinesWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1971
  5. Brewster v. HinesWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1971

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API