Legal Opinion

Williams v. . Turner

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 1, 1935PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

Tbe finding that the defendant did not adopt as his seal the word “(Seal)” appearing at the end of the line, unless he did so by writing his name on said line, is a finding, as we understand it, that the maker had no intention at the time of executing a sealed instrument, which perforce renders it a simple contract. Yarborough v. Monday, 14 N. C., 420; Baird v. Reynolds, 99 N. C., 469; Pickens v. Rymer, 90 N. C., 282; Caputo v. Di Loreto, 148 Atlantic (Conn.), 367.

Whether a mark or character is to be regarded as a seal depends upon the intention of the executant. Jacksonville, etc., Railway…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Jacksonville, Mayport, Pablo Railway & Navigation Co. v. HooperSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  2. Devereux v. . McMahonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  3. Pickens v. . RymerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
  4. Yarborough v. . MondaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1832
  5. Baird v. . ReynoldsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Jefferson Standard Life Insurance v. MoreheadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  2. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond v. KalinCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1936
  3. Allsbrook v. . WalstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  4. Currin v. . CurrinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  5. Bell v. . ChadwickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946

4 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