Gee v. . Young

Superior Court of North Carolina

Gee v. . Young

2 N.C. 17

DecidedApril 5, 1792

StatusPublished

This text of 2 N.C. 17 (Gee v. . Young) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior 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

Gee v. . Young, 2 N.C. 17 (N.C. Ct. App. 1792).

Pincite

Opinion

who delivered the opinion of the Court, said the defendant ought to be allowed for his labor in preparing the ground for tillage, that is, the ground intended for Indian corn; but yet the plaintiff is entitled to recover, and recommended to the jury to give a verdict for *Page 35 the plaintiff for the value of the use of the plantation, after deducting the value of the defendant's labor; which was done accordingly, and plaintiff had judgment.

Cited: King v. Foscue, 91 N.C. 119; Hayes v. Wrenn, 167 N.C. 230.

(18)

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

who delivered the opinion of the Court, said the defendant ought to be allowed for his labor in preparing the ground for tillage, that is, the ground intended for Indian corn; but yet the plaintiff is entitled to recover, and recommended to the jury to give a verdict for *Page 35 the plaintiff for the value of the use of the plantation, after deducting the value of the defendant's labor; which was done accordingly, and plaintiff had judgment.

Cited: King v. Foscue, 91 N.C. 119; Hayes v. Wrenn, 167 N.C. 230.

(18)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 N.C. 17, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gee-v-young-ncsuperct-1792.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack