Legal Opinion

Continental Waste Co. v. Henderson Bros.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 26, 1941PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

What quantum of proof is required to reform a written instrument on the ground of the mutual mistake of the parties? The law answers “clear, strong and convincing.” Johnson v. Johnson, 172 N. C., 530, 90 S. E., 516.

It is true that ordinarily in civil matters the burden of proof is carried by a preponderance of the evidence, or by its greater weight, albeit in a number of cases, as where, for example, it is proposed to correct a mistake in a deed or other writing, to restore a lost deed, to convert a deed absolute on its face into a mortgage, to engraft a parol trust upon a legal estate, to…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Speas v. Merchants Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  2. Jefferson Standard Life Insurance v. MoreheadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  3. Sills v. . FordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  4. Williams v. Blue Ridge Building & Loan Ass'nSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  5. Lamb v. PerrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. In Re Housing Authority of City of SalisburySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  2. Henley v. . HoltSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  3. Henley v. . HoltSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  4. In Re Housing Authority of City of SalisburySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952

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

Powered by the Exa API