Legal Opinion

Henry v. Shore

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided June 13, 1973No. 7320SC262PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CAMPBELL, Judge.

There was no error in dismissing this action as to all defendants. The summary judgment in favor of Shore was correct for that there was no contract in writing pertaining to the conveyance of the realty as required by North Carolina General Statutes 22-2. “A wholly unexecuted parol contract to sell land is void.” Riggs v. Anderson, 260 N.C. 221, 132 S.E. 2d 312 (1963).

With regard to the Talberts, Miller, and the Savings and Loan Association, the North Carolina registration statute, G.S. 47-18, is controlling. Bruton v. Smith, 225 N.C. 584, 36 S.E. 2d 9 (1945); Eller v. Arnold,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Bruton v. . SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  2. Bruton v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  3. Eller v. ArnoldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  4. Riggs v. AndersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Britt v. AllenCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
  2. Hill v. Pinelawn Memorial Park, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  3. Hill v. Pinelawn Memorial Park, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API