RANLO SUPPLY COMPANY v. Clark
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtDenny, J.
The plaintiff contends that under the facts and circumstances revealed on this record, it has an implied contract with the defendants to pay for the materials it furnished to Smith to build the Floyd Clark house on the premises of the defendants.
It would seem that the judgment entered below must be sustained for several reasons.
The evidence, in our opinion, is insufficient to support the plaintiff’s contention that it has an implied contract with the defendants to pay for the materials furnished by it for the construction of the house in question. It is clear from the evidence that the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Morganton Manufacturing & Trading Co. v. AndrewsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- GENERAL AIR CONDITIONING COMPANY v. DouglassSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- Brown v. . WardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Charlotte Pipe & Foundry Co. v. Southern Aluminum Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
- Lookout Lumber Co. v. Mansion Hotel & Belt Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Vetco Concrete Company v. TROY LUMBER COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- Ron Medlin Construction v. HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2010
- Keith v. DayCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- Britt v. BrittSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
- Forsyth County Hospital Authority, Inc. v. SalesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.