Legal Opinion

Hare v. . Weil

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 4, 1938PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWinborne, J.

On the factual situation presented by the record on this appeal, we hold that the judgment as of nonsuit was properly entered.

It is well settled in this jurisdiction that the cestui que trust has the right to buy at the trust sale unless fraud or collusion is alleged or proved. Monroe v. Fuchtler, 121 N. C., 101, 28 S. E., 63; Hayes v. Pace, 162 N. C., 288, 78 S. E., 290; Winchester v. Winchester, 178 N. C., 483, 101 S. E., 25; Simpson v. Fry, 194 N. C., 623, 140 S. E., 295; Bunn v. Holliday, 209 N. C., 351, 183 S. E., 278; Hill v. Fertilizer Co., 210 N. C., 417, 187 S. E., 577; Bank v.…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Avery v. StewartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
  2. Harrison v. North Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
  3. State v. . FulcherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  4. Sykes v. Boone.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
  5. Avery v. . StewartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Atkins v. . Transportation Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
  2. Gaither Corporation v. SkinnerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  3. Atkins v. White Transportation Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
  4. Bryant v. KellySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  5. Rice v. City of LumbertonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952

21 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