Den Ex Dem. Morrison v. Connelly
Supreme Court of North Carolina
From Burke. Ejectmekt for 400 acres of land, tried on the last Circuit, before his honor Judge Martin. The "Defendant having protected himself by showing seven years actual possession, with color of title, the lessor of the Plaintiff to avoid tjie bar, produced the record of a former ejectment between the same parties, for the same premises, in which the Plaintiff had recovered a verdict and judgment for two acres of land, and proved that the present action was brought…
Read the full summary
From Burke. Ejectmekt for 400 acres of land, tried on the last Circuit, before his honor Judge Martin. The "Defendant having protected himself by showing seven years actual possession, with color of title, the lessor of the Plaintiff to avoid tjie bar, produced the record of a former ejectment between the same parties, for the same premises, in which the Plaintiff had recovered a verdict and judgment for two acres of land, and proved that the present action was brought within a year of the determination of the former. His Honor instructed the Jury, that the pendency of the former suit did not…
1Opinion of the Court
Ruffin, Judge.
It is the settled course in personal actions, to allow a new suit to be brought after a non-suit in a former action, though the time of limitation hath expired, provided the first was commenced in due time, and the second within a year after the determination of the former. This is not within the words of the act, but it is established by a long train of decisions, to be within the equity of it.
The idea of the Plaintiff seem to be, that this case is within the like reason, because in ejectment, a verdict in one suit is not a bar to another action.
The doubt (if indeed there be a…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Straus, Hartman, Hofflin & Co. v. BeardsleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1878
- Blades v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Citizens Saving & Loan Co. v. WarrenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933