Legal Opinion

Hines v. Tripp

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 15, 1965No. 609PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRodman, J.

Plaintiffs’ assignments of error are directed to rulings excluding evidence offered for the purpose of establishing the alleged contract.

Defendants’ denial of the alleged contract is equivalent to a plea of the statute of frauds, G.S. 22-2. Hunt v. Hunt, 261 N.C. 437, 135 S.E. 2d 195; Pickelsimer v. Pickelsimer, 257 N.C. 696, 127 S.E. 2d 557; McCraw v. Llewellyn, 256 N.C. 213, 123 S.E. 2d 575; Humphrey v. Faison, 247 N.C. 127, 100 S.E. 2d 524; Jamerson v. Logan, 228 N.C. 540, 46 S.E. 2d 561.

To bind defendants, plaintiffs had the burden of showing a written contract, “or some memorandum or…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Lane v. CoeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  2. Lewis v. . MurraySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
  3. Hall v. Misenheimer.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
  4. Jamerson v. . LoganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  5. McCraw v. LlewellynSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Mezzanotte v. FreelandCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1973
  2. Chaisson v. SimpsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
  3. Yaggy v. BVD COMPANYCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970
  4. Currituck Associates—Residential Partnership v. HollowellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004
  5. Schafer v. Barrier Island Station, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1991

13 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