Legal Opinion

Poole v. . Scott

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 30, 1948PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDeNNY, J.

The plaintiffs contend the contract entered into by and between them and the defendants was a binding and enforceable one. However, it is not alleged that the contract was in writing and signed by the respective parties.

Moreover, it is the general rule that where a vendor contracts to convey lands and the buildings thereon are a material and substantial inducement for the transaction, and such buildings are destroyed by fire, if the contract is incomplete and unenforceable for any reason, the loss will fall on the vendor, and the vendee is not required to complete the contract. Warehouse Co.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. In re Sale of Sermon's LandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  2. In Re Sermon's LandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  3. Sutton v. DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  4. Farmers Tobacco Warehouse Co. v. Eastern Carolina Warehouse Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
  5. Rutherford v. MacQueenWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1931

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Carroll v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  2. Finch v. City of DurhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
  3. Finch v. City of DurhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API