Lee v. . Johnson

22 S.E.2d 230, 222 N.C. 161, 1942 N.C. LEXIS 54
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedOctober 14, 1942
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 22 S.E.2d 230 (Lee v. . Johnson) 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
Lee v. . Johnson, 22 S.E.2d 230, 222 N.C. 161, 1942 N.C. LEXIS 54 (N.C. 1942).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The defendant Johnson, ostensible owner of a fee simple title, having conveyed the locus in quo to an innocent purchaser for value, plaintiffs’ only remedy is by action for damages for the wrongful alienation and conversion of their land by the defendant Johnson. This action was instituted more than five years after the wrongful conversion. The ruling of the court below is sustained by Davis v. Doggett, 212 N. C., 589, 194 S. E., 288. See also Ferguson v. Blanchard, 220 N. C., 1, 16 S. E. (2d), 414, and Massengill v. Oliver, 221 N. C., 132.

The judgment below is

Affirmed.

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

Related

Ricks v. . Batchelor
33 S.E.2d 68 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1945)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
22 S.E.2d 230, 222 N.C. 161, 1942 N.C. LEXIS 54, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lee-v-johnson-nc-1942.