Horne v. Cloninger
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtHiggins, J.
The court correctly held the evidence sufficient to go to the jury on the issues of fraud and damages (Brooks v. Ervin Construction Co., 253 N.C. 214, 116 S.E. 2d 454) but insufficient on punitive damages (Swinton v. Realty Co., 236 N.C. 723, 73 S.E. 2d 785). The charge on the issue of fraud was correct and in accord with the established authorities. With respect to damages, however, the court fell into error — induced in part, at least — by the emphasis the parties placed on the cost of moving the house from the sinking to a solid foundation.
On the issue of damages, the court charged: “That…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Brooks v. Ervin Construction CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
- Swinton v. Savoy Realty Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- Lunn v. . ShermerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
- Hutchins v. DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
- Solon Lodge No. 9 Knights of Pythias Co. v. Ionic Lodge Free Ancient & Accepted, Masons No. 72 Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- River Birch Associates v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
- Weft, Inc. v. G.C. Investment AssociatesDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1986
- Lee v. KeckCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
- Loghry v. CapelSupreme Court of Iowa · 1965
- Nunn v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.