Bunn v. . Holliday
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Curiam.
At the close of plaintiff’s evidence the defendants in the court below made a motion for judgment as in case of nonsuit, C. S., 567. The court below allowed the motion, and in this we can see no error.
The record discloses: “It was admitted that the plaintiff theretofore was the owner of two tracts of land situate in Halifax County, North Carolina, one tract containing 239.15 acres, and the second tract containing eleven acres, more or less, all known as home place and farm of the plaintiff. It was further admitted that the plaintiff executed his note to the defendants to secure an…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hinton v. . WestSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
- Hayes v. PaceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Lockridge v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
- Monroe Bros. v. Fuchtler & KernSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
- Simpson v. . FrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Hare v. . WeilSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
- Wolfe v. North Carolina Joint Stock Land BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
- Hill v. . Fertilizer Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Hill v. Albemarle Fertilizer Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Murphy v. . TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.