Ewing v. Caldwell
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBobbitt, J.
It is not alleged that the deed of 10 June, 1950, from Martha Armstrong to Daisy Caldwell, is void. The allegation made is that Martha Armstrong “understood” that she was conveying her one-half interest in the realty of the partnership as security, it being “the actual intent of Martha Armstrong to secure the investment of $10,-417.18 of Daisy Caldwell.”
In the absence of allegation that the partnership was dissolved and a settlement between the partners made on 10 June, 1950, the inference is permissible, if not compelling, that the partnership continued until the death of Martha Armstrong…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Young v. CooperCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1947
- Shearer v. ShearerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
- Goldberg v. GoldbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
- Sherrod v. . MayoSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
- Justice v. . SherardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Vlamis v. De WeeseCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1958
- Bennett v. ANSON BANK & TRUST COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- Lynch v. Kentucky Tax CommissionCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1960
- District of Columbia v. Riggs National Bank of WashingtonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1975
- NCNB National Bank of North Carolina v. O'NeillCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.