#### N. M. PILKINGTON v. DOC. WELCH.

(Filed 23 December, 1914.)

Appeal and Error — Objections and Exceptions — Admissions—Immaterial Exceptions. ■

Where in an action to recover land defendant has conceded upon the trial that the issues should be answered in plaintiff’s favor if the jury should find the locus in quo to be contained within the description of the plaintiff’s paper title, exceptions to the charge of the court upon the question of adverse possession become immaterial on defendant’s appeal.

Appeal by defendant from Garter, J., at Spring Term, 1914, of G-RÁ-HAM.

Action to recover land, known as Tract No. 20. Tbe plaintiff introduced State Grant No. 61 and mesne conveyances connecting himself with tbe grant.

Tbe defendant denied that tbe paper title of tbe plaintiff covered tbe land in controversy.

Tbe plaintiff contended that tbe beginning corner of bis title was at black figure 1 on tbe plat, and also that if it was red figure 1, as contended by defendant, and bis paper title did not cover tbe land in controversy, that be bad shown title by adverse possession.

Tbe only assignments of error are to parts of tbe charge relating to title by adverse possession.

Tbe jury returned tbe following verdict:

1. Is tbe plaintiff tbe owner and entitled to tbe possession of tbe lands described in tbe complaint? “Yes.”

2. Is tbe defendant in tbe unlawful possession of said land or any part thereof? “Yes.”

3. What damage, if any, is tbe plaintiff entitled to recover? “$24.”

4. What is tbe true beginning corner of Tract No. 20? “Black figure 1.”

Judgment was entered in favor of tbe plaintiff, and tbe defendant appealed.

B. L. Phillips for plaintiff.

Bryson & Blade for defendant.

Per CuriaM.

Tbe exceptions to tbe charge on adverse possession are immaterial, as it was conceded by the defendant upon tbe trial that all tbe issues should be answered in favor of tbe plaintiff if tbe location of tbe plaintiff’s paper title was as contended by him, and tbe jury has so found.

No error.