Price v. Tomrich Corporation

167 S.E.2d 766, 275 N.C. 385, 1969 N.C. LEXIS 409
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJune 18, 1969
Docket33
StatusPublished
Cited by26 cases

This text of 167 S.E.2d 766 (Price v. Tomrich Corporation) 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
Price v. Tomrich Corporation, 167 S.E.2d 766, 275 N.C. 385, 1969 N.C. LEXIS 409 (N.C. 1969).

Opinion

*388 SHARP, J.

The question presented is the sufficiency of plaintiff’s evidence to withstand defendant’s motion for nonsuit. The following facts are established by the pleadings and stipulations or are not controverted:

Plaintiff and defendant Corporation (defendant) own adjoining land in the Bragtown area of Durham County. They dispute a lap-page of 2.82 acres. In September 1887 all the property now owned or claimed by the parties was owned by Plawkins Chisenhall. The division of this property is shown on a map, made 22 July 1968 by George C. Love, Jr., registered land surveyor (D-4). An outline of the pertinent portions of this map is reproduced herein. The disputed area, triangular in shape, is designated as Tract A on D-4. A map, made by J. W. Copley on 11 June 1968 (P-I), shows Tract A only. An outline of it is likewise reproduced.

Defendant, with an unbroken chain of title from Hawkins Chisen-hall, has the superior record title to Tract A. Defendant also has record title to Tract B, 20.7 acres adjoining Tract A on the south, and to Tract C, a smaller area adjoining Tract B on the east. Defendant acquired record title to these three tracts on 13 March 1968 by two deeds, which described the property as one tract and referred to a map made December 1937. Each deed conveyed a one-half interest and excluded from the warranty of title the 2.82 acres “claimed by J. Y. Hinson in Deed Book 200 at page 507, Durham County Registry.” Reference was also made to Plat Book 24 at page 49.

Plaintiff’s claim to Tract A stems from a deed from Charles W. White, Commissioner, to her predecessor in title, Dr. J. Y. Hinson. This deed was executed and delivered to Hinson on 5 December 1952 pursuant to an order of the Clerk of the Superior Court of Durham County in a special proceeding brought by the administrator C.T.A. of David M. Chisenhall to sell decedent’s land (supposed to contain about 75 acres) to make assets to pay debts. Before advertising the land for sale, the Commissioner employed a civil engineer, Hunter Jones, to locate the property, mark the lines, and provide an accurate description of it.

The map and description which Jones furnished showed a single tract of 77.75 acres. By mistake Jones included within its perimeter 2.82 acres (Tract A), which David M. Chisenhall did not own. The land'was advertised and sold, and the deed to Hinson was prepared, *391 in accordance with the Jones map, which was recorded in Plat Book 24 at page 49, Durham County Registry.

*389

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

Related

Brien v. Lynch
Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2025
Gonzalez v. Marfione
Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2025
Duke Energy Progress, Inc. v. Kane
827 S.E.2d 312 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2019)
Adams Creek Associates v. Davis
746 S.E.2d 1 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2013)
Woodring v. Swieter
637 S.E.2d 269 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2006)
McManus v. Kluttz
599 S.E.2d 438 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2004)
Lake Drive Corp. v. Portner
422 S.E.2d 452 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1992)
Matter of Bell
421 S.E.2d 590 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1992)
Willis v. Mann
386 S.E.2d 68 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1989)
Brittain v. Correll
335 S.E.2d 513 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1985)
Cobb v. Spurlin
327 S.E.2d 244 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1985)
Higdon v. Davis
324 S.E.2d 5 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1984)
Spivey v. Porter
310 S.E.2d 369 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1984)
Crisp v. Benfield
307 S.E.2d 179 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1983)
Willis v. Johns
286 S.E.2d 646 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1982)
Smithers v. Collins
278 S.E.2d 286 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1981)
Allen v. Morgan
269 S.E.2d 753 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1980)
Matter of Cusson
258 S.E.2d 858 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1979)
Cameron v. Howard
251 S.E.2d 900 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1979)
Cozart v. Chapin
251 S.E.2d 682 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
167 S.E.2d 766, 275 N.C. 385, 1969 N.C. LEXIS 409, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/price-v-tomrich-corporation-nc-1969.