Mizell v. . Burnett
Supreme Court of North Carolina
ActioN of assumpsit, tried before bis Honor, Judge Ellis, at tbe Spring Term, 1857, of "Washington Superior Court. Tbe defendant was tbe owner of a tract of land on tbe Eoanolce river, called tbe ’Walling tract, on which tlicre were growing a large number of white-oak trees, suitable for making staves.
Read the full summary
ActioN of assumpsit, tried before bis Honor, Judge Ellis, at tbe Spring Term, 1857, of "Washington Superior Court. Tbe defendant was tbe owner of a tract of land on tbe Eoanolce river, called tbe ’Walling tract, on which tlicre were growing a large number of white-oak trees, suitable for making staves. It appeared that tbe plaintiff and defendant being in treaty relative to the sale and purchase of these trees, the former, about 1st of February, 1853, wentto examine them, and thence went to see the defendant, who lived at William-ston, Martin county. What then took place between the parties…
1Opinion of the CourtPearson, J.
It was properly conceded that a contract to sell“ growing trees” is within the statute of frauds, being a contract to sell “ land or some interest in, or concerning the same.”
We are of opinion with his Honor, that to make a contract to sell growing trees binding on the vendor, it is sufficient that the contract be signed by him, and it is not necessary that it should also be signed by the vendee. The statute provides that the contract shall be signed by the “ party to be charged therewith.” This answers the. purpose, which is to exclude perjury in an action to enforce the contract. In…
2Cited by36 opinions
- Manpower of Guilford County, Inc. v. HedgecockCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
- Bateman v. . HopkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
- Hawkins v. Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
- Lumber Co. v. Corey.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- Lewis v. . MurraySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.