Legal Opinion

Craig v. . Price

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 25, 1936PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDevin, J.

Plaintiff bases his action upon the alleged breach of an agreement to delay the foreclosure of a deed of trust long in default.

There being no consideration for the promise to extend the time for foreclosure, it will not support a contract enforceable in law, or give ground for an action for damages for its breach. Cromartie v. Lumber Co., 173 N. C., 712; Jackson v. Bank, 203 N. C., 357.

A promise is not binding in law if founded solely on a consideration which the law holds insufficient to create a legal obligation. Hatchell v. Odom, 19 N. C., 302; Williams v. Chevrolet Co., 209 N. C., 29.

The…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Winders v. . HillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
  2. State Ex Rel. Oliver v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
  3. Williams v. Dixie Chevrolet Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
  4. Hatchell v. . OdomSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1837
  5. Bryant v. . KellumSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Brannock v. FletcherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  2. Silver v. North Carolina Board of TransportationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  3. Stonestreet v. Southern Oil Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  4. CERTAIN-TEED PRODUCTS CORPORATION v. SandersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  5. Ring Drug Co. v. Carolina Medicorp Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989

6 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