Case ID: nc_8/html/0337-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Taylor, Chief-Justice.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATUTE OP LIMITATIONS.
    Doe on demise of Pritchard & others v. Sawyer.
    From Pasquotank
    
      Ejectment. The lands in controversy in the year 1790 descended, on the death of one James Pritchard, to his brothers, Enoch, Elisha, David, and John. Of these, Enoch and Elisha were lessors of the Plaintiff, and the other lessors were the children and heirs at law of John and David, both of whom died intestate. David Pritch-ard came of age in 1803, and died in 1817, leaving his heirs at law infants, and they are still such ; John came of age in 1805, and died in 1807, leaving his heirs at law infants, and they still remain infants. Enoch came of age in 1808, and Elisha in 1811. The declaration in this case was dated October 21, 1819.
    The Defendant, and those under whom he claimed, had been in actual possession of the lands described in the declaration, claiming them under deeds of conveyance, from the 10th of June, 1794, up to October, 1819.
    On these facts there was a verdict and judgment, in the Court below, for the Defendant, and Plaintiff appealed.
   Taylor, Chief-Justice.

The Defendant, and those under whom he claims, have been in actual possession under a colour of title, of the land in controversy, from June, 1794, to October, 1819, a period of more than twenty-five years. David came of ago in 1803, and lived fourteen years afterwards. The statute therefore ran against him, and his heirs are consequently barred.

John came of age in 1805, and lived two years, so that the statute began to run against him, and completed the bar against his heirs in 1812. Tiie statute had run out against Enoch in 1815, and against Elisha in 181°- abutt si± mouths before the date of the declaration i'u ejectment. All the lessors have therefore lost their right of entry, and the. judgment must consequently be affirmed.

IIaiu and Henjoekson, Judges, concurred.