Legal Opinion

Burton v. Durham Realty & Insurance

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 29, 1924PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, J.

The two adjacent lots in question, Nos. 1 and 2, were sold by the Durham Realty and Insurance Company to its codefendant, 0. A. Mangum, who in turn sold them to the plaintiff. Later, the Durham Realty and Insurance Company repurchased lot No. 2, which it now owns, and lot No. 1 is owned by the plaintiff.

In the spring of the present year the plaintiff offered to sell his lot to one Joseph Simpson, not a party herein, who declined to purchase, because of an alleged défect in plaintiff’s title. The court is asked to> say that plaintiff has a good title to lot No. 1, and that the defendant,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. McKethan v. . RaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874
  2. Parker v. Raleigh Savings BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
  3. Bates v. . LillySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1871
  4. Blake v. . AskewSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1877
  5. Millikan v. . FoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1881

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Pruitt v. WoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  2. Pruitt v. . WoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  3. Washington-Detroit Theatre Co. v. MooreMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Town of Tryon v. Duke Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  5. Whitney v. RandallIdaho Supreme Court · 1937

11 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