From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

AMIS v. STEPHENS

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Sep 1, 1892
16 S.E. 17 (N.C. 1892)

Opinion

(September Term, 1892.)

Tenant in Common — Color of Title — Possession, Adverse — Sale, Judicial and Execution.

The vendee of a tenant in common, or the purchaser at execution sale of land belonging to a tenant in common, takes only such estate or interest as such tenant had, and hence twenty years' adverse possession will be necessary to bar the contenants; but where a purchaser claims under a judicial sale, based upon a decree which purports to cover the whole estate in the tract, and a deed in conformity therewith, it constitutes color of title to the whole, and seven years' adverse possession will bar the other tenants.

APPEAL from Whitaker, J., at Spring Term, 1892, of PERSON.

W. W. Kitchin (by brief) for plaintiffs. (174)

V. S. Bryant for defendants.


This case is "on all fours" with McCulloh v. Daniel, 102 N.C. 529, which is decisive of it. His Honor's attention was doubtless not called to that case. This is not a deed made by one tenant in common purporting to convey the whole, nor a deed of a sheriff under an execution sale against one tenant in common. In those cases the purchaser takes the right — neither more nor less — which the tenant in common had, and becomes a tenant in common in his stead. Hence twenty years' adverse possession of the whole is necessary to bar the other tenants in common. Ward v. Farmer, 92 N.C. 93.

But here the sale, made by order of the court in 1860, purporting to convey the whole, and the decree and deed of the commissioner to same effect, is like the deed of a stranger. It was color of title, and the defendants, and those under whom they claim, have been in adverse possession ever since. It has been more than three years since 1882 (when all the plaintiffs ceased to be under disability) to the beginning of this action, and the defendants have acquired a good title. The Code, secs. 141, 148; Johnson v. Parker 79 N.C. 475.

Upon the facts found, judgment must be entered below in favor of the defendants.

REVERSED.

Cited: Ferguson v. Wright, 113 N.C. 544; Lumber Co., v. Cedar Works, 165 N.C. 86; Alexander v. Cedar Works, 177 N.C. 143; Adderholt v. Lowman, 179 N.C. 550.

(175)


Summaries of

AMIS v. STEPHENS

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Sep 1, 1892
16 S.E. 17 (N.C. 1892)
Case details for

AMIS v. STEPHENS

Case Details

Full title:J. N. AMIS ET AL. v. L. J. STEPHENS ET AL

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Sep 1, 1892

Citations

16 S.E. 17 (N.C. 1892)
111 N.C. 172

Citing Cases

Walker v. Walker

Only those could, thereafter, take an estate of inheritance in the land set apart to the several parties…

Perry v. Bassenger

Ipock v. Bank, 206 N.C. 791, 175 S.E. 127. Finally, it is to be observed that the deed of Ward, commissioner,…