Reichler v. Tillman
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
PARKER, Judge.
Both motions were purportedly made under Rule 56 relating to summary judgments. The record on appeal, however, contains no affidavits, answers to interrogatories, or anything else other than the pleadings upon which to base decision. Therefore, the motions will be considered as though made under Rule 12 (c) for judgment on the pleadings.
We first consider the trial court’s ruling allowing the motion of the feme defendant. We find this ruling in error. Plaintiffs alleged that they “entered into a binding contract with defendants” for the purchase of the land. Both defendants…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hargrove v. . AdcockSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
- Mooney v. . MullSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- Lewis v. AllredSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
- Neaves v. North State Mining Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
- Oliver v. . DixSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1835
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Huss v. HussCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976
- Groves v. Community Housing Corp. of Haywood CountyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
- Burton v. KenyonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
- Deans v. LaytonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
- Fuller v. Southland Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.