Dunn v. . Moore
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This cause, havingbeen set for hearing, on the bill, answers, exhibits, and proofs, at the Fall Term, 1844, of Sampson Court of Equity, was then removed by consent to the Supreme Court.
Read the full summary
This cause, havingbeen set for hearing, on the bill, answers, exhibits, and proofs, at the Fall Term, 1844, of Sampson Court of Equity, was then removed by consent to the Supreme Court. The plaintiff complains, that he purchased from the defendant, Moore, by parol, in the year 1836, the tract of land set forth in his bill, containing one hundred and thirty-five acres, at five dollars per acre ; that he paid him, at the time of making the contract, one hundred dollars, and agreed to pay a discharge, a note for about five hundred dollars, due from said Moore to one Daniel Kornegay; that the…
1Opinion of the CourtNash, J.
The object of the bill is two fold — either to compel the defendants to convey the land to the plaintiff, or that a decree for an account may be made of the value of the plaintiff’s improvements, and for the money paid by him, and the land be held as security for such sum as may be decreed. We do not think the plaintiff entitled to either relief. The ground upon which he seeks the former is, that of part performance of a parol contract. He alleges he has paid part of the purchase money, and been put into possession by the defendant ■Moore. In his bill, the plaintiff sets forth that he had…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Eaton v. . DoubSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- Grantham v. . GranthamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
- Jamerson v. . LoganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
- Abbott v. Hunt.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1901
- Luton v. Badham.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1900
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.