Legal Opinion

Manecke v. Kurtz

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided August 21, 2012No. COA11-1447PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BRYANT, Judge.

Where the record fails to disclose the existence of genuine issues of material fact as to whether defendants entered into a contract to purchase plaintiffs real property, the trial court did not err by granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment.

In 2010, Christopher B. Manecke (“plaintiff’), a resident of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina sought to sell his residence located at 21104 Blakely Shores Drive, Cornelius, North Carolina. Plaintiff engaged the services of real estate broker Linda Schafer (“Schafer”) to list the property for sale. Jerrold M. Kurtz and Deborah A.…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. DeWitt v. Eveready Battery Co., Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2002
  2. Harris v. Ray Johnson Construction Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
  3. McCutchen v. McCutchenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2006
  4. Crocker v. RoethlingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2009
  5. Ellis v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Adams v. The City of RaleighCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
  2. Cabarrus Cty. Bd. of Educ. v. Dep't of State TreasurerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2018
  3. Quality Built Homes Inc. v. Town of CarthageCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2015
  4. Christie v. Hartley Construction, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2013
  5. Jenkins v. BattsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016

5 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