Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1953–2009 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Oxendine v. Lewisgreen2 sentences1965“When the granting clause in a deed to real property conveys an unqualified fee and the habendum contains no limitation on the fee thus *630 conveyed and the fee simple title is warranted in the covenants of title, any additional clause or provision repugnant thereto and not by reference made a part thereof, inserted in the instrument as a part of, or following the description of the property conveyed, or elsewhere other than in the granting or habendum clause, which tends to delimit the estate thus conveyed, will be deemed mere surplusage without force or effect.” Jeffries v. Parker, 236 N.C. 1965“When the granting clause in a deed to real property conveys an unqualified fee and the habendum contains no limitation on the fee thus *630 conveyed and the fee simple title is warranted in the covenants of title, any additional clause or provision repugnant thereto and not by reference made a part thereof, inserted in the instrument as a part of, or following the description of the property conveyed, or elsewhere other than in the granting or habendum clause, which tends to delimit the estate thus conveyed, will be deemed mere surplusage without force or effect.” Jeffries v. Parker, 236 N.C. | 1 | 5 |
King Associates, LLP v. Bechtler Development Corp.green2 sentences2009Further, “[w]hen language creating a fee simple determinable and possibility of reverter is contained within the granting or habendum clause of a deed, this limitation on the fee simple interest is valid.” King Associates, LLP v. Bechtler Development Corp., 179 N.C. 2009App. 88, 94 , 632 S.E.2d 243, 248 (2006) (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Kennedy v. Kennedy
green
2 sentences1965“When the granting clause in a deed to real property conveys an unqualified fee and the habendum contains no limitation on the fee thus *630 conveyed and the fee simple title is warranted in the covenants of title, any additional clause or provision repugnant thereto and not by reference made a part thereof, inserted in the instrument as a part of, or following the description of the property conveyed, or elsewhere other than in the granting or habendum clause, which tends to delimit the estate thus conveyed, will be deemed mere surplusage without force or effect.” Jeffries v. Parker, 236 N.C. 1965“When the granting clause in a deed to real property conveys an unqualified fee and the habendum contains no limitation on the fee thus *630 conveyed and the fee simple title is warranted in the covenants of title, any additional clause or provision repugnant thereto and not by reference made a part thereof, inserted in the instrument as a part of, or following the description of the property conveyed, or elsewhere other than in the granting or habendum clause, which tends to delimit the estate thus conveyed, will be deemed mere surplusage without force or effect.” Jeffries v. Parker, 236 N.C. | 4 | 1953–1965 |
Jeffries v. Parker
green
2 sentences1965“When the granting clause in a deed to real property conveys an unqualified fee and the habendum contains no limitation on the fee thus *630 conveyed and the fee simple title is warranted in the covenants of title, any additional clause or provision repugnant thereto and not by reference made a part thereof, inserted in the instrument as a part of, or following the description of the property conveyed, or elsewhere other than in the granting or habendum clause, which tends to delimit the estate thus conveyed, will be deemed mere surplusage without force or effect.” Jeffries v. Parker, 236 N.C. 1965“When the granting clause in a deed to real property conveys an unqualified fee and the habendum contains no limitation on the fee thus *630 conveyed and the fee simple title is warranted in the covenants of title, any additional clause or provision repugnant thereto and not by reference made a part thereof, inserted in the instrument as a part of, or following the description of the property conveyed, or elsewhere other than in the granting or habendum clause, which tends to delimit the estate thus conveyed, will be deemed mere surplusage without force or effect.” Jeffries v. Parker, 236 N.C. | 3 | 1964–1976 |
Whitley v. . Arenson
green
2 sentences1960Artis v. Artis, 228 N.C. 754 , 47 S.E. 2d 228 , and cases cited; Kennedy v. Kennedy, 236 N.C. 419 ; Whitley v. Arenson, 219 N.C. 121 , 12 S.E. 2d 906 ; McNeill v. Blevins, 222 N.C. 170 , 22 S.E. 2d 268 . 1960Artis v. Artis, 228 N.C. 754 , 47 S.E. 2d 228 , and cases cited; Kennedy v. Kennedy, 236 N.C. 419 ; Whitley v. Arenson, 219 N.C. 121 , 12 S.E. 2d 906 ; McNeill v. Blevins, 222 N.C. 170 , 22 S.E. 2d 268 . | 2 | 1953–1960 |
McNeill v. . Blevins
neutral
2 sentences1960Artis v. Artis, 228 N.C. 754 , 47 S.E. 2d 228 , and cases cited; Kennedy v. Kennedy, 236 N.C. 419 ; Whitley v. Arenson, 219 N.C. 121 , 12 S.E. 2d 906 ; McNeill v. Blevins, 222 N.C. 170 , 22 S.E. 2d 268 . 1960Artis v. Artis, 228 N.C. 754 , 47 S.E. 2d 228 , and cases cited; Kennedy v. Kennedy, 236 N.C. 419 ; Whitley v. Arenson, 219 N.C. 121 , 12 S.E. 2d 906 ; McNeill v. Blevins, 222 N.C. 170 , 22 S.E. 2d 268 . | 2 | 1953–1960 |
Artis v. . Artis
green
2 sentences1960Artis v. Artis, 228 N.C. 754 , 47 S.E. 2d 228 , and cases cited; Kennedy v. Kennedy, 236 N.C. 419 ; Whitley v. Arenson, 219 N.C. 121 , 12 S.E. 2d 906 ; McNeill v. Blevins, 222 N.C. 170 , 22 S.E. 2d 268 . 1960Artis v. Artis, 228 N.C. 754 , 47 S.E. 2d 228 , and cases cited; Kennedy v. Kennedy, 236 N.C. 419 ; Whitley v. Arenson, 219 N.C. 121 , 12 S.E. 2d 906 ; McNeill v. Blevins, 222 N.C. 170 , 22 S.E. 2d 268 . | 2 | 1953–1960 |
Anderson v. Jackson County Board of Education
green
1 sentence2009Anderson v. Jackson County Bd. of Education, 76 N.C. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Edwards v. Butler
neutral
2 sentences1965“When the granting clause in a deed to real property conveys an unqualified fee and the habendum contains no limitation on the fee thus *630 conveyed and the fee simple title is warranted in the covenants of title, any additional clause or provision repugnant thereto and not by reference made a part thereof, inserted in the instrument as a part of, or following the description of the property conveyed, or elsewhere other than in the granting or habendum clause, which tends to delimit the estate thus conveyed, will be deemed mere surplusage without force or effect.” Jeffries v. Parker, 236 N.C. 1965“When the granting clause in a deed to real property conveys an unqualified fee and the habendum contains no limitation on the fee thus *630 conveyed and the fee simple title is warranted in the covenants of title, any additional clause or provision repugnant thereto and not by reference made a part thereof, inserted in the instrument as a part of, or following the description of the property conveyed, or elsewhere other than in the granting or habendum clause, which tends to delimit the estate thus conveyed, will be deemed mere surplusage without force or effect.” Jeffries v. Parker, 236 N.C. | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.