Lamm v. . Lamm
This text of 173 S.E. 309 (Lamm v. . Lamm) 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.
Opinion
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
173 S.E. 309, 206 N.C. 905, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 346, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lamm-v-lamm-nc-1934.