Church v. . Academy

9 N.C. 233
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided December 5, 1822·Published

Opinion

The case was submitted, without argument by Hawks for the appellant, andGaston for the appellee. A possession of thirty-five years under an act of Assembly must doubtless be considered a good title in law, according to the reason of all the decisions which have been made touching color of title. It is not perceived on what ground any valid objection could be made to it; for every presumption is to be made in favor of an act of the Legislature, and supposing it to be unconstitutional, non constat that this was known to the defendants, and it still afforded a color of title. The judgment must be

PER CURIAM. Affirmed.

Cited: Kron v. Hinson, 53 N.C. 348; McConnell v. McConnell. 64 N.C. 344;Ellington v. Ellington, 103 N.C. 58; Neal v. Nelson, 117 N.C. 405;Burns v. Stewart, 162 N.C. 366. *Page 134

(235)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Church v. . Academy, 9 N.C. 233 (N.C. 1822).

9 N.C. 233 (Church v. . Academy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ellington v. . Ellington
9 S.E. 208 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1889)
Burns v. . Stewart
78 S.E. 321 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1913)
Doe on Dem of McConnell v. McConnell
64 N.C. 342 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1870)