Gribble v. Gribble
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
PARKER, Judge.
In general, an unfulfilled promise will not support an action for fraud. If, however, at the time the promise is made the promisor has no intention to perform and the promisee reasonably relies on the promise to act to his injury, the promise may constitute a misrepresentation of a material fact such as to support an action for fraud. This is so because the state of mind of the promisor is a subsisting fact which has been falsely represented. Gadsden v. Johnson, 261 N.C. 743, 136 S.E. 2d 74 (1964) ; Davis v. Davis, 236 N.C. 208, 72 S.E. 2d 414 (1952). Plaintiffs here have…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Davis v. DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
- Gadsden v. JohnsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- Cornatzer v. NicksCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1972
- Tharpe Ex Rel. Tharpe v. NewmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
3Cited by4 opinions
- In the Matter of Will of EdgertonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976
- Mesimer v. StancilCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
- Quidore v. All. Plastics, LLCNorth Carolina Business Court · 2020
- Willis v. TritleDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 2019