Farmers Co-Operative Fertilizer Co. v. Eason
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.
The appellant takes the position that the contract purporting to extend the maturity of the note, even if sufficiently definite in point of time, was improperly admitted in evidence because it varied the terms of a written agreement. In this opinion we do not concur. If a contract is not within the statute of frauds the parties may elect to put their agreement in writing, or to contract orally, or to reduce some of the terms to writing and leave the others in parol. If a part be written and a part verbal, that which is written cannot ordinarily be aided or contradicted by parol evidence, but…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Miller v. . LashSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1881
- Skinner v. . TerrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- Freeman v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
- State Ex Rel. Greene County v. National BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
- Helsabeck v. . DoubSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Jefferson Standard Life Insurance v. MoreheadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Brown v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
- Roebuck v. . CarsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
- Sykes v. . EverettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Lipe v. Citizens Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.