An action may be brought by any person against another who claims an estate or interest in real property adverse to him for the purpose of determining such adverse claims; and by any man or woman against his or her wife or husband or alleged wife or husband who have not lived together as man and wife within the two years preceding, and who at the death of such plaintiff might have or claim to have an interest in his or her estate, and a decree for the plaintiff shall debar all claims of the defendant in the property of the plaintiff then owned or afterwards acquired: Provided, that no such relief shall be granted against such husband or wife or alleged wife or husband, except in case the summons in said action is personally served on such defendant.
If the defendant in such action disclaim in his answer any interest or estate in the property, or suffer judgment to be taken against him without answer, the plaintiff cannot recover costs. In any case in which judgment has been or shall be docketed, whether such judgment is in favor of or against the person bringing such action, or is claimed by him, or affects real estate claimed by him, or whether such judgment is in favor of or against the person against whom such action may be brought, or is claimed by him, or affects real estate claimed by him, the lien of said judgment shall be such claim of an estate or interest in real estate as is contemplated by this section. (1893, c. 6; 1903, c. 763; Rev., s. 1589; 1907, c. 888; C.S., s. 1743.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
71
cases (
8 in the last 5 years), 1944–2025 · leading case:
Chappell v. Donnelly, 439 S.E.2d 802 (N.C. Ct. App. 1994).
Chappell v. Donnelly, 439 S.E.2d 802 (N.C. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 12× “In the event title *628 to the land is put in issue, the Clerk may not hear the case, but must transfer it to the Superior Court where it becomes, in effect, an action to quiet title pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 41-10 (1984). Cobb, 73 N.C. App.”
Fabrikant v. Currituck Cnty., 621 S.E.2d 19 (N.C. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 4× “While plaintiffs cite numerous cases! construing the quiet title statute, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 41-10 , it is § 44-10.1 that constitutes the waiver of sovereign immunity and not § 44-10! The question is not whether plaintiffs have asserted a claim under § 44-10, but rather whether…”
New Covenant Worship Ctr. v. Wright, 601 S.E.2d 245 (N.C. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 8× “An action to quiet title to realty pursuant to section 41-10 of the North Carolina General Statutes requires two essential elements: (1) the plaintiff must own the land in controversy, or have some estate or interest in it; and (2) the defendant must assert some claim to such…”
Metcalf v. Black Dog Realty, LLC, 684 S.E.2d 709 (N.C. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 4× “On 8 January 2008, defendant Black Dog Realty likewise moved to dismiss, raised numerous affirmative defenses, and brought counterclaims against Plaintiffs for slander of title and to quiet title pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 41-10 and in equity. The County filed á motion for…”
York v. Newman, 163 S.E.2d 282 (N.C. Ct. App. 1968).
· cites it 7× “The distinction between a suit to remove a cloud upon title and an action to quiet title under G.S. 41-10 is clear. In the old equity action, to remove a cloud upon title to real property, the proceeding was an equitable one and was intended to remove a particular instrument or…”
Merrick v. Peterson, 548 S.E.2d 171 (N.C. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 2× “Therefore, the two cases have neither identity of subject matter, nor issues, and res judi-cata does not bar plaintiffs áction in this case.”
Hensley v. Samel, 593 S.E.2d 411 (N.C. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 4× “G.S. § 41-10 provides that “[a]n action may be brought by any person against another who claims an estate or interest in real property adverse to him for the purpose of determining such adverse claims.”
Kelley v. Citifinancial Servs., Inc., 696 S.E.2d 775 (N.C. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 5× “The complaint sought “a judgment of the Court establishing that Plaintiffs title to the [Bermuda Run property] is free and clear of the lien of the Deed of Trust” and a “permanent injunction ordering Defendants to cancel the Deed of Trust of record, pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. §…”
Foreman v. Sholl, 439 S.E.2d 169 (N.C. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 4× “Foreman) appeal from an order for summary judgment entered against them in their action to quiet title, pursuant to N.C.Gen.Stat. § 41-10 (1984), to 59 tracts of property located in or near the town of Montreat.”
Greene v. Tr. Servs. Of Carolina, LLC, 781 S.E.2d 664 (N.C. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 2× “Assuming, without deciding, that the doctrine does not apply to the quiet title claim, we hold that the superior court properly granted the motion to dismiss because the amended complaint fails to sufficiently allege a claim to quiet title.”
Ballance v. Dunn, 385 S.E.2d 522 (N.C. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 4× “But plaintiffs, who had already sought equitable relief in the form of an injunction, could have added to their pending lawsuit a claim to quiet title based on the quitclaim deeds.”
McLennan v. Josey, 758 S.E.2d 888 (N.C. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 6× “On 27 August 2010, plaintiffs filed a “COMPLAINT TO ESTABLISH BOUNDARY AND QUIET TITLE” pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 41-10 . Plaintiffs alleged that defendants “claimed ownership of lands owned by Plaintiffs and have created a cloud on title to Plaintiff’s [sic] property.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.