Legal Opinion

Brooks v. Hackney

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided November 6, 1990No. 8915SC1199PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARNOLD, Judge.

The question presented on appeal is whether the trial court properly denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. We must determine (1) whether there is a genuine issue as to any material fact, and (2) whether the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. N.C.R. Civ. P. 56(c).

Plaintiff argues that the trial court should have granted his motion for summary judgment because the evidence raised no material issue of fact, but only a question of law: is the property description contained in the writings sufficiently definite to meet *564the requirements of the statute of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Kidd v. EarlySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  2. Lane v. CoeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  3. Thompson v. . UmbergerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  4. Searcy v. . LoganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  5. Bradshaw v. McElroyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Brooks v. HackneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
  2. Brooks v. HackneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API