Legal Opinion

Conner v. Ridley

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 17, 1958No. 20PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBobbitt, J.

We pass, without discussion or decision, appellee’s contention that the excluded evidence was insufficient to support a finding that Mrs. Lillie Conner made an oral agreement with plaintiff as alleged; for, in our view, the testimony tending to show such oral agreement, being in direct conflict with plaintiff’s deed, is incompetent.

A well established rule is stated by Hoke, J. (later C. J.), in this oft-quoted excerpt from his opinion in the case of Gaylord v. Gaylord, 150 N.C. 222, 227, 63 S.E. 1028: “Upon the creation of these estates (parol trusts), however, our authorities seem to have…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Gaylord v. GaylordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
  2. Gaylord v. . GaylordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
  3. Barbee v. . BarbeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  4. Walters v. . WaltersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  5. Campbell v. . SigmonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Marriott Financial Services, Inc. v. Capitol Funds, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  2. Willetts v. WillettsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  3. Rourk v. Brunswick CountyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  4. Speller v. SpellerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  5. Pelaez v. PelaezCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1972

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API