From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Church v. Academy

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Dec 1, 1822
9 N.C. 233 (N.C. 1822)

Opinion

December Term, 1822.

A possession of thirty-five years under an act of the Legislature gives good title in law, even though such act be unconstitutional.

EJECTMENT, brought to recover possession of a lot of land in New Bern. The lot was, prior to the year 1776, purchased and granted for the support of the ministry of the Protestant Episcopal Church of New Bern. The lessors of the plaintiff occupied the lot as a glebe under this grant until the year 1787, when the defendants entered into possession thereof, and have continued in the possession ever since, claiming title under an act of the General Assembly passed in 1786, which after (234) a recital in the preamble that the lot of land in New Bern, commonly known by the appellation of the glebe, would tend to increase the funds of the academy in said town if the same were vested in the trustees thereof, proceeds to enact that the same be vested in the said trustees, and authorizes them to take possession of the same. The above statement of facts was submitted, by the consent of parties, to the court below, with the question arising thereon. viz.: Whether the plaintiffs were barred of their right by the act of limitations? The court decided that they were so barred, and rendered judgment for the defendants accordingly. The plaintiffs appealed to this Court.


The case was submitted, without argument by Hawks for the appellant, and Gaston for the appellee.


A possession of thirty-five years under an act of Assembly must doubtless be considered a good title in law, according to the reason of all the decisions which have been made touching color of title. It is not perceived on what ground any valid objection could be made to it; for every presumption is to be made in favor of an act of the Legislature, and supposing it to be unconstitutional, non constat that this was known to the defendants, and it still afforded a color of title. The judgment must be

PER CURIAM. Affirmed.

Cited: Kron v. Hinson, 53 N.C. 348; McConnell v. McConnell. 64 N.C. 344; Ellington v. Ellington, 103 N.C. 58; Neal v. Nelson, 117 N.C. 405; Burns v. Stewart, 162 N.C. 366.

(235)


Summaries of

Church v. Academy

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Dec 1, 1822
9 N.C. 233 (N.C. 1822)
Case details for

Church v. Academy

Case Details

Full title:DOE ON THE DEMISE OF THE TRUSTEES OF THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF…

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Dec 1, 1822

Citations

9 N.C. 233 (N.C. 1822)

Citing Cases

White v. Sparkill Realty Co.

Here the purpose of the suit is to eject appellants from lands which for five months had been and still were…

McConnell v. McConnell

e, and to ascertain whether this will was so obviously defective for the purpose of passing lands as to come…