Case Name: CALDWELL LAND AND LUMBER COMPANY v. GLOBE LUMBER COMPANY
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1909-12-01
Citations: 151 N.C. 390
Docket Number: 
Parties: CALDWELL LAND AND LUMBER COMPANY v. GLOBE LUMBER COMPANY.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 151
Pages: 390–391

Head Matter:
CALDWELL LAND AND LUMBER COMPANY v. GLOBE LUMBER COMPANY.
(Filed 1 December, 1909.)
Deeds and Conveyances — Title — Boundaries — Agreement of Parties — Evidence Immaterial.
When, it is agreed, between tbe parties in a suit to establish title to land that tbe controversy depended upon tbe beginning corner of E. grant, and if so found tbe controverted territory would not be covered by plaintiff’s grant, evidence of declarations for tbe purpose of establishing certain pine and maple corners of a grant to G. irrelevant.
Appeal by plaintiff from Justice, J., May Term, 1909, of Caldwell.
Action for damages, to restrain tlie cutting of timber by defendant on lands .to which plaintiff claims title.
W. C.'Newland and Jones & Whisnant for plaintiff.
Mark Squires and Lawrence Wakefield for defendant.

Opinion:
Pee Curiam :
The appellant abandons all exceptions except the second, which was to evidence as to the declaration of Gragg as to a certain maple being a corner in his boundary, and the seventh, as to a paragraph in the charge in regard to a pine corner in Gragg's line.
It is not necessary to consider these exceptions, for this controversy was submitted to the jury, not on the location of the Gragg line, but on the beginning corner of the Estes grant. It was admitted that if the beginning corner of the Estes grant was at "30" on the map, then the controverted territory was not covered by plaintiff's grant.
Upon this view alone was the ease submitted to the jury. The jury have found such corner according to defendant's contention. The location of the Gragg line depended altogether on the location of the Estés grant; the jury have located that, and the plaintiff admits of record that if the corner of the grant to Estes is at "30," then it has no claim to the controverted territory.
If, therefore, any error has been committed, the plaintiff is in nowise prejudiced thereby.
No error.