Atkinson v. . McIntyre

Ashe, J.

The answer of the defendants does not set up any substantial defense to the petition. It is evasive and disingenuous. While they admit that land, such as that described in the petition, was conveyed to the grantees mentioned therein, and that their father purchased two-fifths of said land, yet- they insist that no title passed by any of these conveyances in consequence of an uncertainty in the location of the land. From the character of the answer, we are strongly impressed with the suspicion that the defendants, or some of them, are in possession of the very land under a title derived from their father, Dugald C. McIntyre, and his wife Demaris, and in order to keep out the plaintiffs from the rightful enjoyment of their interest in common with them, they have been driven to the flimsy, elusive and frivolous defense set up in their answer.

There is no error. The judgment of the superior court must be affirmed. Let this be certified to the superior court of Robeson county, that the case may be¡ remanded to the clerk of that court, that the frivolous answer of the defendants may be disregarded, and the case proceeded with according to law. The plaintiffs are entitled to their costs in this court.

No error. Affirmed.