Fritts v. Gerukos
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
La:ke, J.
The validity of the ordinance is not questioned by either party. The plaintiffs do not contend that the defendant was not the owner in fee simple of the land described in the option agreement. They do not contend that a deed, proper in form, executed and delivered to them by the defendant would not have conveyed the land to them in fee simple. Their contention is that the existence of the ordinance and the failure of the defendant to comply with its provisions constituted an encumbrance such as to prevent him from giving to them a deed as specified in the option agreement.
A covenant…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Lincoln Trust Co. v. Williams Building Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Josefowicz v. PorterNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1954
- Miller v. Milwaukee Odd Fellows Temple, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
- Lohmeyer v. BowerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1951
- Cover v. . McAdenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Marathon Builders, Inc. v. PolingerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1971
- Marriott Financial Services, Inc. v. Capitol Funds, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974
- McCain v. CoxDistrict Court, N.D. Mississippi · 1982
- WAR EAGLE, INC. v. BelairCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
- Wilcox v. Pioneer Homes, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.