Dill-Cramer-Truitt Corp. v. Downs

141 S.E. 570, 195 N.C. 189, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 45
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedFebruary 22, 1928
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 141 S.E. 570 (Dill-Cramer-Truitt Corp. v. Downs) 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.

Bluebook
Dill-Cramer-Truitt Corp. v. Downs, 141 S.E. 570, 195 N.C. 189, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 45 (N.C. 1928).

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

There are at least two exceptive assignments of error appearing on the record which make it necessary to remand the cause for another hearing.

The court instructed the jury, inter alia, that in the present action the burden was on the plaintiff to show (1) title out of the State, and (2) adverse possession for seven years under color, or for twenty-one years without color. These instructions, as given, were erroneous.

In actions involving title to real property, where the State is not a party, other than in trials of protested entries laid for the purpose of obtaining grants, the title is conclusively presumed to be out of the State, and neither party is required to show such fact, though either may do so. C. S., 426; Moore v. Miller, 179 N. C., 396, 102 S. E., 627; Pennell v. Brookshire, 193 N. C., 73, 136 S. E., 257.

And in actions between individual litigants, as here, when one claims title to land by adverse possession and shows such possession (1) for seven years under color, or (2) for twenty years without color, either showing is sufficient to establish title in this jurisdiction. C. S., 428 and 430; Power Co. v. Taylor, 191 N. C., 329, 131 S. E., 646; S. c., 194 N. C., 231.

For the errors, as indicated, a new trial must be awarded, and it is so ordered.

New trial.

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

Related

Vance v. . Guy
31 S.E.2d 766 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1944)
Ramsey v. . Ramsey
29 S.E.2d 340 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1944)
Ward v. . Smith
25 S.E.2d 463 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1943)
Hayes v. Sells Cotton
160 S.E. 453 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)
Pitman v. . Hunt
150 S.E. 13 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
141 S.E. 570, 195 N.C. 189, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 45, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dill-cramer-truitt-corp-v-downs-nc-1928.