Doggett v. Hardin.

44 S.E. 369, 132 N.C. 690, 1903 N.C. LEXIS 339
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMay 19, 1903
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 44 S.E. 369 (Doggett v. Hardin.) 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
Doggett v. Hardin., 44 S.E. 369, 132 N.C. 690, 1903 N.C. LEXIS 339 (N.C. 1903).

Opinion

Douglas, J.

This is an action apparently for the recovery of land, with damages resulting from its unlawful detention, although the exact nature of the relief demanded and indeed of the plaintiff’s claim, does not clearly appear in the pleadings. However, we will treat it as an -action in the nature of ejectment, which in its origin and essential features is a possessory action. It is true this form of action has been long since adopted as the usual method of determining the title to land, but from its very nature it will not lie against one not in possession. This is equally true whether the action is under The Code or at Common Law. Viewed simply as an action under The Code for the recovery of real property, it is evident that the land cannot be recovered from one who is neither in actual nor constructive possession. As there was no evidence tending to show that the defendants were in possession at the time of the bringing of this action, the motion for non-suit was properly allowed.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Wilson v. . Wilson
94 S.E. 669 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
44 S.E. 369, 132 N.C. 690, 1903 N.C. LEXIS 339, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doggett-v-hardin-nc-1903.