Maynard v. . Holder

5 S.E.2d 535, 216 N.C. 524, 1939 N.C. LEXIS 33
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided November 22, 1939·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

It is prescribed by C. S., 1743: “An action may be brought by any person against another who claims an estate or interest in real property adverse to him for the purpose of determining such adverse claims.”

Giving a liberal construction to this remedial statute, it is apparent that the court below was in error in dismissing this action. The pleadings were sufficient to raise an issue under which the court could proceed to determine the rights of the parties. Satterwhite v. Gallagher, 173 N. C., 525, 92 S. E., 369; Hardware Co. v. Cotton Co., 188 N. C., 442, 124 S. E., 756.

Reversed.

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

Maynard v. . Holder, 5 S.E.2d 535, 216 N.C. 524, 1939 N.C. LEXIS 33 (N.C. 1939).

5 S.E.2d 535 (Maynard v. . Holder) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pressly v. Walker
78 S.E.2d 920 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1953)
Tolbert v. Greenwood Cotton Mill
48 S.E.2d 599 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1948)