Burriss v. . Starr
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by defendant from Olina, J., at November Term, 1913, of Catawba. This action was brought by plaintiff for tbe specific performance of a contract, wbicb be says was made by tbe defendant, to convey to bim for $600 a tract of land known as tbe dower of Mrs. Starr.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendant from Olina, J., at November Term, 1913, of Catawba. This action was brought by plaintiff for tbe specific performance of a contract, wbicb be says was made by tbe defendant, to convey to bim for $600 a tract of land known as tbe dower of Mrs. Starr. Tbe only written evidence of tbe contract offered by tbe plaintiff was parol proof of tbe contents of a note, wbicb bad been lost,’ given in 1909 by bim to tbe defendant for tbe land, and payable in annual installments, witb interest from 1 January, 1910. Tbe note was prepared by tbe defendant at bis borne and sent to tbe…
1Opinion
The defendant's exceptions, save one or two of them, have been decided favorably to him in the plaintiff's appeal. He makes no objection to the judgment for the $130 and interest, but contends, and prayed the court to so instruct the jury, that the note under seal for $200, given by him to the plaintiff in settlement of their differences, was without consideration. But a bond does not require a consideration, as the seal imports one. It was so held in Harrell v. Watson, 63 N.C. 454, where the same defense was pleaded to an action upon a sealed note. In that case it was said by Chief Justice…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Smith v. . JoyceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- State v. . AbernethySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- Harrell, Administrator C. v. . Watson and OthersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1869
- Beck v. . Wilkins-Ricks CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
- Arrington v. Town of PinetopsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.