Legal Opinion

Hardy v. Edwards

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided July 3, 1974No. 743SC440PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PARKER, Judge.

In construing a deed it is the duty of the court to ascertain the intent of the grantor as embodied in the entire instrument, and every part of the deed must be given effect if this can be done by any reasonable interpretation. Rouse v. Strickand, 260 N.C. 491, 133 S.E. 2d 151. “Generally stated, the rule is that in order for the court to hold any part of a deed void for repug-nancy, the rejected part must be irreconcilably conflicting with the granting, holding, and warranty clauses.” Reynolds v. Sand Co., 263 N.C. 609, 139 S.E. 2d 888.

Applying these well established principles…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Oxendine v. LewisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  2. Reynolds v. BV Hedrick Gravel & Sand Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  3. Rouse v. StricklandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Board of Transportation v. PelletierCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
  2. Jamin v. WilliamsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
  3. North Carolina National Bank v. MorrisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  4. Hardy v. EdwardsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  5. Simmons v. Quick Stop Food Mart, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API