Reeves v. . MillerReeves v. . Miller
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Per Curiam.
It is unnecessary to consider the exceptions discussed in defendant’s brief, as the deed attacked by the plaintiffs in this action appears on its face to be a deed of gift, and was not registered within two years as required by C. S., 3315.
The deed was therefore void. Booth v. Hairston, 195 N. C., 8.
No error.