Legal Opinion

Field v. . Moody

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 5, 1892Published

This was an ACTION to recover possession of land, heard before Whitaker, J., at the February Term, 1892, of Chatham Superior Court, in which the defendants set up a parol agreement to convey, which is denied by the plaintiffs, who plead the statute of frauds.

Read the full summary

This was an ACTION to recover possession of land, heard before Whitaker, J., at the February Term, 1892, of Chatham Superior Court, in which the defendants set up a parol agreement to convey, which is denied by the plaintiffs, who plead the statute of frauds. The following judgment was consented to: “ This cause coming on to be heard before the Court, now the parties being personally present, and represented by their counsel, it is by consent ordered and adjudged that this action is referred to the arbitrament and award of Charles E. McLean, whose award is to be a rule of Court, and who shall…

1Opinion of the Court

Burwell, J.:

There was no exception taken by plaintiffs to the order made at Fall Term, 1891, by which the cause was referred back, for the purposes therein named, to the arbitrator whom the parties had selected, and it is stated in the “ case on appeal ” that the plaintiffs withdrew all exception to the award. The agreement of the parties to submit the matter in controversy to arbitration contains the stipulation that no writ of possession for the land described in the complaint should be issued “until the determination of the matters submitted to the arbitrament and award of the said…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Pitt v. . MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888
  2. Hedgepeth v. . RoseSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
  3. Herman v. . WattsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890

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

Powered by the Exa API