Legal Opinion

Grant v. . Brown

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 22, 1937PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStagy, C. J.

The record, as it appears here, is barren of any evidence to support the verdict on the second cause of action. This will be stricken out, and as thus modified, judgment will be entered for the plaintiff on the first cause of action.

The defendant having denied any extension of the option, and pleaded the statute of frauds, will not be permitted to retain moneys paid on the purchase price after the expiration of the option. Warren v. Dail, 170 N. C., 406, 87 S. E., 126. To hold otherwise would be to allow the defendant “to have his cake and eat it too.” Young v. Hood, Comr., 209 N. C., 801,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Warren v. . DailSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
  2. Whitmire v. Provident Life & Accident InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  3. Young v. . Hood, Comr. of BanksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. . RobinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  2. State v. RobinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  3. Rochlin v. P. S. West Construction Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951

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

Powered by the Exa API