Bright v. Peerless Lumber Co.
This text of 113 S.E. 506 (Bright v. Peerless Lumber Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Tbe contract excepts tbe second-growth timber and tbe original growth in tbe pastures. Tbe timber in controversy is embraced within tbe boundaries of tbe land described in tbe contract, and as tbe plaintiffs have prevented its removal, they have tbe burden of showing that tbe timber.is within tbe exception. It is not admitted that tbe timber which tbe defendant has been prevented from cutting is second growth, or in tbe pastures. This is a question which tbe jury should determine. Batts v. Batts, 128 N. C., 22; Wyman v. Taylor, 124 N. C., 426; Bernhardt v. Brown, 122 N. C., 589; Steel Co. v. Edwards, 110 N. C., 354.
New trial.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
113 S.E. 506, 184 N.C. 614, 1922 N.C. LEXIS 139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bright-v-peerless-lumber-co-nc-1922.