Peel v. Peel
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBeogdeN, J.
The plaintiffs based their cause of action upon the covenants and stipulations contained in the deed and not upon the notes. Hence the principle of law with respect to gifts inter vivos does not apply. The-correct rule governing the present controversy is stated in Herring v. Lumber Co., 163 N. C., 481, 79 S. E., 876, as follows: “It is very generally held here and elsewhere that the grantee in a deed poll, containing covenants and stipulations purporting to bind him, becomes bound for their performance, though he does not execute the deed.” Maynard v. Moore, 76 N. C., 158; Fort v. Allen, 110…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Fort v. . AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
- Helms v. Helms.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Maynard v. . MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1877
- Herring v. Wallace Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Hill v. . HillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Coxe v. . DillardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
- First Carolinas Joint Stock Land Bank of Columbia v. PageSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933