From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Houser v. Reynolds

Superior Court of North Carolina SALISBURY —
Mar 1, 1795
2 N.C. 143 (N.C. Super. 1795)

Opinion

March Term, 1795

An infant who makes a deed can confirm it verbally after becoming of age.

EJECTMENT. Plaintiff and defendant both claimed under one Wright, who while an infant had conveyed to Houser, and, after full age, to Reynolds; but after coming of age, and before he conveyed to Reynolds, he said to Houser: "I will never take advantage of my having been an infant at the time of executing the deed, and it is my wish that you should keep the land." Mr. Whyte cited some cases from Bac. Ab., Verb, Infant, where such or the like words had been held to be a confirmation of the deed. (144)


directed the jury to find for the plaintiff; and they did so. There were many other points made by the counsel in the argument of this case, but the whole cause seemed at length to turn upon this only, and therefore the others are omitted.

Cited: Leak v. Gilchrist, 13 N.C. 73.

Overruled: Hoyle v. Stowe, 19 N.C. 327; Ward v. Anderson, 111 N.C. 117.


Summaries of

Houser v. Reynolds

Superior Court of North Carolina SALISBURY —
Mar 1, 1795
2 N.C. 143 (N.C. Super. 1795)
Case details for

Houser v. Reynolds

Case Details

Full title:HOUSER v. REYNOLDS

Court:Superior Court of North Carolina SALISBURY —

Date published: Mar 1, 1795

Citations

2 N.C. 143 (N.C. Super. 1795)

Citing Cases

Ward v. Anderson

That in order to avoid the deed mere words are not sufficient, but there must be some deliberate act done, by…