V. . Heritage

Superior Court of North Carolina

V. . Heritage

3 N.C. 327

DecidedJuly 5, 1804

StatusPublished

This text of 3 N.C. 327 (V. . Heritage) 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

V. . Heritage, 3 N.C. 327 (N.C. Ct. App. 1804).

Pincite

Opinion

The line of A. B. is to be considered as the boundary of the land sold by Heritage. He did not sell any beyond that, and of course did not sell to the plaintiff the land he says he did. If that land has been recovered from the plaintiff, this covenant does not subject defendant to pay for the value of it.

Verdict and judgment accordingly.

NOTE. — See Smith v. Murphey, ante, 183, and the references in the note thereto.

Cited: Dula v. McGhee, 34 N.C. 333; Bowen v. Gaylord, 122 N.C. 821. *Page 277

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

The line of A. B. is to be considered as the boundary of the land sold by Heritage. He did not sell any beyond that, and of course did not sell to the plaintiff the land he says he did. If that land has been recovered from the plaintiff, this covenant does not subject defendant to pay for the value of it.

Verdict and judgment accordingly.

NOTE. — See Smith v. Murphey, ante, 183, and the references in the note thereto.

Cited: Dula v. McGhee, 34 N.C. 333; Bowen v. Gaylord, 122 N.C. 821. *Page 277

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 N.C. 327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/v-heritage-ncsuperct-1804.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack