Harris v. . Powell

Superior Court of North Carolina

Harris v. . Powell

3 N.C. 349

DecidedJuly 5, 1805

StatusPublished

This text of 3 N.C. 349 (Harris v. . Powell) 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

Harris v. . Powell, 3 N.C. 349 (N.C. Ct. App. 1805).

Pincite

Opinion

NOTE. — See Standen v. Bains, 2 N.C. 238; Tate v. Southard, 8 N.C. 45;Taylor v. Shuford, 11 N.C. 116; Mendenhall v. Cassells, 20 N.C. 49. But *Page 306 the rule of admitting hearsay in questions of boundary must be confined to what deceased persons have said. Gervin v. Meredith, 4 N.C. 439. And the hearsay evidence must not be post litem motam. Dancy v. Sugg, 19 N.C. 515.

Cited: Hurley v. Morgan, 18 N.C. 430; Hartzog v. Hubbard, 19 N.C. 243;Whitehurst v. Pettipher, 87 N.C. 179; Smith v. Headrick, 93 N.C. 212;Shaffer v. Gaynor, 117 N.C. 20; Yow v. Hamilton, 136 N.C. 359.

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

NOTE. — See Standen v. Bains, 2 N.C. 238; Tate v. Southard, 8 N.C. 45;Taylor v. Shuford, 11 N.C. 116; Mendenhall v. Cassells, 20 N.C. 49. But *Page 306 the rule of admitting hearsay in questions of boundary must be confined to what deceased persons have said. Gervin v. Meredith, 4 N.C. 439. And the hearsay evidence must not be post litem motam. Dancy v. Sugg, 19 N.C. 515.

Cited: Hurley v. Morgan, 18 N.C. 430; Hartzog v. Hubbard, 19 N.C. 243;Whitehurst v. Pettipher, 87 N.C. 179; Smith v. Headrick, 93 N.C. 212;Shaffer v. Gaynor, 117 N.C. 20; Yow v. Hamilton, 136 N.C. 359.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 N.C. 349, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-powell-ncsuperct-1805.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack