Legal Opinion

City of Kinston v. Suddreth

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 2, 1966No. 356PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSharp, J.

Defendant demurred on the ground that, in their contract, the parties had expressly fixed and limited the maximum amount of damages which the City could recover from him in the event he failed to comply with his bid; that he had the choice of performing or forfeiting; and that the City, therefore, can recover no more than the agreed amount which the parties had denominated “liquidated damages.” Plaintiff's position is that the contract provision was not for liquidated damages, but for a penalty which the court will not enforce, thus permitting plaintiff to recover its actual damages.

At the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Wheedon v. American Bonding & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1901

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Knutton v. CofieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  2. Mahoney v. TingleyWashington Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Eastern Carolina Internal Medicine, P.A. v. FaidasCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  4. Samost v. Duke UniversityCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2013
  5. Ledbetter Bros. v. North Carolina Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984

11 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