Walker v. . Phelps

162 S.E. 727, 202 N.C. 344, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 499
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMarch 2, 1932
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 162 S.E. 727 (Walker v. . Phelps) 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
Walker v. . Phelps, 162 S.E. 727, 202 N.C. 344, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 499 (N.C. 1932).

Opinion

This action was begun on 24 August, 1931, by a petition filed by the plaintiffs in the Superior Court of Washington County, in accordance *Page 345 with the provisions of chapter 102, Public Laws of North Carolina, Session 1931, known as "The Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act." The relief prayed for by the plaintiffs is a declaratory judgment determining their rights on the facts alleged in their petition.

In response to citations duly served on them, the defendants filed answers to the petition. No issue of fact was raised by said answers; only issues of law were raised by the pleadings.

It appeared from the pleadings that there was a controversy between the parties to the action with respect to the rights of the plaintiffs under a deed executed by the defendant, Virginia-Carolina Joint Stock Land Bank, by which the said bank conveyed the land described therein to the plaintiffs. This deed is dated 1 April, 1930. It was duly recorded in the office of the register of deeds of Washington County on 24 July, 1930. The tract of land conveyed by this deed contains 600 acres, more or less, and is a part of the W. T. Alexander Farm, which was owned by the defendant, Virginia-Carolina Joint Stock Land Bank. This farm contained 1,200 acres, more or less.

On 27 January, 1930, the defendant, Virginia-Carolina Joint Stock Land Bank, entered into a contract in writing with its codefendant, W. T. Phelps, by which it agreed to sell and convey a part of said Alexander Farm, containing 600 acres, more or less, to the said defendant, upon the terms and conditions set out in said contract. This contract was not recorded at the date of the deed from the said bank conveying to the plaintiffs the remaining part of said Alexander Farm.

The W. T. Alexander Farm lies between Lake Phelps and the Scuppernong River, in Washington County. It is drained from the lake to the river by the Mountain Canal. This canal traverses said farm, practically dividing it into two parts. Lateral ditches and drainways have been constructed by which water is carried from the farm into the canal, and thence into Scuppernong River. The canal and these ditches and drainways constitute a common drainage system for the Alexander Farm.

The contract between the defendant, Virginia-Carolina Joint Stock Land Bank, and its codefendant, W. T. Phelps, dated 27 January, 1930, and not recorded at the date of the deed from the defendant bank to the plaintiffs, contains the following stipulations, with respect to the Mountain Canal:

"(a) That the main road along the Mountain Canal is to be at all times kept open for the benefit of the aforesaid tract of land, and the remainder of said Alexander Farm owned by said bank, but gates may be placed across the same.

(b) That said Mountain Canal is to at all times remain open, the expense of keeping the same in condition to be borne by the owner or *Page 346 owners of the aforesaid tract of land, and the owner or owners of the remainder of said Alexander Farm, said expense to be in proportion to the number of acres of the aforesaid tract and of the remainder of said tract draining into said canal, but the above described tract to be conveyed to the said Phelps is only to be charged with the proportionate part of the upkeep of said canal from the first cross-ditch north of the south line of said tract to Scuppernong River, and the said bank, or any owner or owners of the said Alexander lands shall have the right to go through the lands herein contracted to be sold for the purpose of keeping in repair the said Mountain Canal up to the point to which said Phelps lands are to participate in the upkeep. The repairs and upkeep of said Mountain Canal shall be made by the owner or owners of the aforesaid 600-acre tract, and the owner or owners of the remainder of said Alexander Farm, and if either should decline to pay his part of said repairs, then either party may make said repairs upon giving sixty days written notice to the other party and such portions of such expense as may be chargeable to the party refusing, shall, upon reduction to judgment, constitute a lien upon the lands of the refusing party, which lien shall be superior to all others.

(c) No lands other than the above tract of 600 acres, and the remainder of the said Alexander Farm now owned by said bank shall be allowed to drain in the said Mountain Canal and at no time shall said canal be flooded by water from Lake Phelps, nor shall the waters of said lake be turned through said canal."

The deed from the defendant, Virginia-Carolina Joint Stock Land Bank, to the plaintiffs, dated 1 April, 1930, and duly recorded on 24 July, 1930, contains the following covenants and stipulations:

(a) That the grantees shall have the right of ingress and egress over and along the main road which parallels the Mountain Canal north of the lands above described, which right and privilege shall extend to the said grantees and their successors in title, subject, however, to the right of the owner, or owners, of that portion of the Alexander Farm lying north of the lands above described, to maintain gates across said road.

(b) The lands herein conveyed shall have the right to drain through said Mountain Canal, which said canal is at all times to remain open, the expense of keeping the same in condition to be borne by the owner, or owners of the lands herein conveyed, and the owner, or owners of the remainder of said Alexander Farm, said expense to be in proportion to the number of acres herein conveyed draining into said canal, and of the remainder of said Alexander Farm draining in said canal; and the said grantees and their successors in title, shall have the right to go through that portion of the Alexander Farm situated north of the lands *Page 347 herein conveyed, for the purpose of keeping in repair the said Mountain Canal. The repairs and upkeep of said Mountain Canal shall be made by the grantees and their successors in title and by the owner, or owners of the remainder of said Alexander Farm, and if either should decline to pay his or their part of said repairs, then either party may make said repairs upon giving sixty days written notice to the other party, and such portion of such expense as may be chargeable to the party refusing shall, upon reduction to judgment, constitute a lien upon the lands of the refusing party, which lien shall be superior to all others.

(c) No lands other than those herein conveyed and the remainder of said Alexander Farm, shall be allowed to drain into said Mountain Canal, and at no time shall said canal be flooded by water from Lake Phelps nor shall the waters of said lake be turned through said canal.

(d) It is intended by this conveyance to give and convey to the grantees and their successors in title, the same use and privilege with respect to said Mountain Canal as formerly owned and enjoyed by the said W. T. Alexander, expressly reserving, however, the same use and privilege for the benefit of the remainder of said Alexander Farm, all subject to the conditions heretofore specified."

The plaintiffs contended that the stipulations contained in their deed with respect to the Mountain Canal are covenants which run with the land conveyed to them by said deed, and that said covenants are binding upon their grantor, Virginia-Carolina Joint Stock Land Bank, and upon all persons claiming title under said bank to any part of the Alexander Farm, subsequent to the registration of their deed. The defendant, W. T.

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

Related

State of NC v. Cube Yadkin Generation LLC
Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2021
Usconnect, LLC v. Sprout Retail, Inc.
2017 NCBC 36 (North Carolina Business Court, 2017)
Town of Boone v. State
794 S.E.2d 710 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 2016)
Town of Beech Mountain v. Genesis Wildlife Sanctuary, Inc.
786 S.E.2d 335 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2016)
Town of Beech Mountain v. Genesis Wildlife Sanctuary
Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2016
American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina, Inc. v. State
639 S.E.2d 136 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2007)
Town of Spencer v. Town of East Spencer
522 S.E.2d 297 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1999)
Smith v. Watson
322 S.E.2d 588 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1984)
York v. Newman
163 S.E.2d 282 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1968)
Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company v. Roberts
134 S.E.2d 654 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1964)
Little v. Wachovia Bank and Trust Company
113 S.E.2d 689 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1960)
Reed v. Elmore
98 S.E.2d 360 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1957)
Borders v. Yarbrough
75 S.E.2d 541 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1953)
Waldrop v. Town of Brevard
62 S.E.2d 512 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1950)
Town of Tryon v. Duke Power Co.
22 S.E.2d 450 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1942)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
162 S.E. 727, 202 N.C. 344, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walker-v-phelps-nc-1932.