Legal Opinion

Hicks v. . Kearney

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 25, 1925PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.

When the consent judgment of 1923 was rendered, the situation was this: W. Hal Mann had executed the notes and the mortgage to Mrs. Williams and had sold his equity of redemption to Kearney, who had paid a part of the purchase price and had executed certain purchase-money notes, which were secured by a deed of trust. It had been agreed between them that W. H. Ruffin should hold Kearney’s notes for the purchase money to the amount of $1,000 to indemnify Kearney against possible loss arising out of encumbrances on the property. The notes and the mortgage had been assigned by Mrs. Williams to…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Shwab v. DoyleSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  2. TERRETT & OTHERS v. Taylor & OthersSupreme Court of the United States · 1815
  3. City Railway Co. v. Citizens' Street RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  4. Waddill v. . MastenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  5. Lowe v. . HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Wilson v. AndersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  2. Smith v. MercerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  3. Smith v. . DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
  4. State v. GreenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1999
  5. Smith v. DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947

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