Helms v. B & L Investment Co., Inc.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
BALEY, Judge.
The sole issue for determination in this case is whether the supervening action of the governmental authorities of the city, of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County in prohibiting the defendants from extending water and sewer lines to the land sold to plaintiffs will excuse the defendants from the performance of their obligations to plaintiffs under the guaranty or from the payment of damages for their failure to so perform.
The material facts concerning the issue of liability are uncontradicted. As an inducement to plaintiffs to purchase the property,' the' defendants made an…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Goldston Brothers v. NewkirkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
3Cited by8 opinions
- Wichita Properties v. LantermanCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1981
- Vergote v. K Mart Corp.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1987
- Juarez v. Hamner, Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler)1984
- Landis v. HodgsonIdaho Court of Appeals · 1985
- Hazard v. HazardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.