Legal Opinion
Sanders v. Wilkerson
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
Decided January 9, 1974No. 7311SC549PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MORRIS, Judge.
Defendant argues in his brief that even though the written agreement was declared null and void, there was an oral agreement and plaintiff consented and agreed for defendant to go upon his lands and take the sand and gravel.
We said in Builders Supplies Co. v. Gainey, 14 N.C. App. 678, 681, 189 S.E. 2d 657 (1972) :
“While commercial gravel belongs to the mineral kingdom in that it is inorganic and formed by nature alone, it is not regarded as a mineral under the mining laws of North Carolina. Lillington Stone Co. v. Maxwell, 203 N.C. 151, 165 S.E. 351 (1932). (But see G.S.…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Council v. . SanderlinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
- Builders Supplies Co. of Goldsboro, NC, Inc. v. GaineySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- Lance v. Butler.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Dean v. MattoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
- Lewis v. W. D. Rountree & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1878
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Knott v. WASHINGTON HOUSING AUTHORITY, ETC.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
- Leggett v. RoseDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1991
- Sanders v. WilkersonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974