Swaine v. Bell

3 N.C. 139
CourtSuperior Court of North Carolina
DecidedMay 15, 1801
StatusPublished

This text of 3 N.C. 139 (Swaine v. Bell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior 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
Swaine v. Bell, 3 N.C. 139 (N.C. Ct. App. 1801).

Opinion

laylor, Judge.

A natural boundary is always adhered to when called for. It cannot be altered as artificial boundaries may, by the marking of new lines, defacing marks or the decay of trees ¡ — -.therefore the western branch is to be taken to be the boundary. As to the next course it, matters not that a northeast course was called for ; had it been a western course, which, would have gone directly from Elizabeth river, still we must have proceeded from the head of the creek to Elizabeth river, that being a natural boundary, and the course is not to be regarded. As to the possession, it makes no title for the plaintiff or defendant, unless it has been under a colour of title.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 N.C. 139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/swaine-v-bell-ncsuperct-1801.