¶1 after stating the case: This action is to compel the defendant to open the streets and alleys on the land sold to him, and is governed by Church v. Dula, 148 N. C., 262. This section of the proposed town was, it is true, laid off on the map, but it was cut off, conveyed to defendant and fenced out before any of the streets and' alleys were ever used, and no lot was ever sold in this abandoned section. The land company conveyed this section, including the proposed streets and alleys, to the defendant, in 1893, and, in February, 1897, the town authorities quitclaimed to the defendant any rights it might have to the streets and alleys in this abandoned and discarded “cut-off.” This action began more than ten years thereafter — 30 April, 1907. The plaintiffs have slept on their rights, if any they had. Staton v. Railroad, 147 N. C., 428.
¶2 Besides, the plaintiffs are in no situation to assert any equitable rights. All the lots they hold were acquired after the land *729 company bad conveyed tbis “cut-off” to tbe defendant, except One beld by tbe beirs of W. M. Absber, wbo was a party, as- an officer of tbe land company, to tbe deed to tbe defendant, and tbe other plaintiffs are two corporations, tbe president and owner of tbe majority of tbe stock in both of which companies (W. P. Trogden) was likewise an officer of tbe land company and a party to tbe conveyance to tbe defendant.
¶3 Tbe judgment dismissing tbe action as of nonsuit is
¶4 Affirmed.