Legal Opinion

Harrill v. Sinclair Refining Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 26, 1945PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSeawell, J.

Without prejudice to the appellant, we may refrain from discussing any distinction in the reciprocal duties of the parties which might arise from the fact that plaintiff was a sub-tenant of Oates Motor Company; and may assume that the more direct relation of landlord and tenant existed between the parties ab initio.

The common law applies in this jurisdiction on the general subject of repairs between landlord and tenant. Ordinarily, in the absence of an agreement relating to repairs or warranty relating to the condition of the property when leased, the lessee takes it in its then existing…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Jordan v. . MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
  2. Fields v. . OgburnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
  3. R. C. H. Covington Co. v. Masonic Temple Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1917
  4. Smithfield Improvement Co. v. Coley-BardinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
  5. Hudson v. Singleton Silk Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1923

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Marina Food Associates, Inc. v. Marina Restaurant, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
  2. Lenz v. Ridgewood AssociatesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  3. Phillips v. Stowe Mills, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969
  4. Robinson v. ThomasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  5. Thomas v. HOUSING AUTH. OF CITY OF BREMERTONWashington Supreme Court · 1967

6 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