Legal Opinion

Balentine v. . Gill

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 20, 1940PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

It appears from a perusal of the pleadings that the plaintiffs are here seeking to hold the defendant Gill on his alleged oral agreement to answer the debt, default or miscarriage of his tenant-optionee and codefendant Warren.’ Gill denies the alleged agreement and pleads the statute of frauds. C. S., 987. In this state of the record, it is difficult to see how the plaintiffs can get along as against the defendant Gill. Henry v. Hilliard, 155 N. C., 372, 71 S. E., 439, 49 L. R. A. (N. S.), 1; Gulley v. Macy, 84 N. C., 434; McIntosh on Procedure, 486.

Recovery is to be had, if allowed at all,…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Emerson v. SlaterSupreme Court of the United States · 1860
  2. Bonham v. . CraigSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879
  3. Peele v. PowellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
  4. Morrison v. . BakerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879
  5. Talley v. Harriss Granite Quarries Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1917

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Burlington Industries, Inc. v. FoilSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  2. Ritchie v. . WhiteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  3. Coley v. . DalrympleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  4. Ritchie v. WhiteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  5. Jamerson v. . LoganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948

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

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

Powered by the Exa API