Hatcher v. Rose
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
FRYE, Justice.
In this appeal, defendants present us with the issue of whether prepayment is allowed on a promissory note executed for the purchase of real estate when the note does not by specific language either prohibit or permit prepayment. We answer this question in the affirmative and reverse the Court of Appeals’ decision directing summary judgment for plaintiffs.
Defendants Earl G. Rose and Bonnie H. Rose, who are husband and wife, purchased real property for the sum of $70,000 from the plaintiffs, M. S. Hatcher and Betty M. Hatcher, who are also husband and wife. Defendants executed a…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Mahoney v. FurchesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Steelman v. City of New BernSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- Arthur v. BurkichAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- Smithwick v. . WhitleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
- Bell Bakeries, Inc. v. Jefferson Standard Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. Rand & Reed Powers PartnershipDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1997
- Promenade Towers Mutual Housing Corp. v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1991
- Dimarco v. ShayOhio Court of Appeals · 2003
- Young v. SodaroWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1995
- West Raleigh Group v. Massachusetts Mutual Life InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1992
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.