Legal Opinion

Harris-Teeter Supermarkets, Inc. v. Hampton

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided September 17, 1985No. 8514SC72PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARNOLD, Judge.

The defendant’s motion for summary judgment was based upon two grounds. She argued that the option was not timely exercised, and that the conditions precedent to her obligations were not fulfilled. Summary judgment, is appropriate only where there are no genuine and material issues of fact to be resolved. Texaco, Inc. v. Creal, 310 N.C. 695, 314 S.E. 2d 506 (1984). However, if summary judgment was proper for either of these reasons, the judgment must be affirmed.

First we will determine whether summary judgment based upon Mrs. Hampton’s claim that she was not required to perform…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Harris & Harris Construction Co. v. Crain & Denbo, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  2. Marriott Financial Services, Inc. v. Capitol Funds, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  3. Crockett v. First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  4. Goodyear v. GoodyearSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  5. Texaco, Inc. v. CreelSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Arkwright-Boston Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Company v. Calvert Fire Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
  2. Davis v. MacOn County Board of EducationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2006
  3. Arkwright-Boston Manufacturers Mutual Insurance v. Calvert Fire InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
  4. BONE v. UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA HEALTH CARE SYSTEMDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2022
  5. Baird v. BairdCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987

2 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