Legal Opinion

Riggs v. Anderson

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 18, 1963PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

The court did not err in nonsuiting plaintiffs. No memorandum or other instrument of writing containing the terms of the alleged offer and acceptance were signed by the parties or their attorneys or placed upon the minutes of the court, so far as the record on appeal discloses. Defendants accepted no part of the money tendered. A wholly unexecuted parol contract to sell land is void. Carpenter v. Yancey, 231 N.C. 160, 56 S.E. 2d 396; Kluttz v. Allison, 214 N.C. 379, 199 S.E. 395. A defense of the statute of frauds may be taken advantage of by general denial. Humphrey v. Faison, 247 N.C.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Humphrey v. FaisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  2. Kluttz v. . AllisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  3. Carpenter v. YanceySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Henry v. ShoreCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1973

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

Powered by the Exa API