Lamm v. . Lamm

173 S.E. 309, 206 N.C. 905, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 346
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided March 21, 1934·Published

Opinion

Per Cubiam.

Tbe court below at tbe close of plaintiff’s evidence sustained a motion made by defendant for judgment as in case of non-suit. C. S., 561. In this we can see no error. Tbe defendant practically each year promised to make title to plaintiff, but never did so. Plaintiff testified: “After I built tbe buildings I asked him for a deed. At that time be was having a line dispute with an adjoining landowner and be told me there was a little corner and be did not know who would draw it. His sister might draw it. He said be might get it. That was tbe reason be put me off tbe first time and be kept putting me off each year. . . . He refused every time I made a demand on him. I was in possession of tbe place thirteen or fourteen years. I paid taxes on it. I bad it cultivated.”

Tbe present case is distinguishable from Vann v. Newsom, 110 N. C., 122. Tbe judgment below is

Affirmed.

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

Lamm v. . Lamm, 173 S.E. 309, 206 N.C. 905, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 346 (N.C. 1934).

173 S.E. 309 (Lamm v. . Lamm) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Vann v. . Newsom
14 S.E. 519 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1892)