Legal Opinion

Stern v. Benbow

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 15, 1909PublishedCited by 18 opinions

Appeal by defendant from Long, JFebruary Term, 1909, of • G-uileord. Tbe facts are stated in tbe opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

OlaRK, O. J.

Tbe jury found, in response to tbe issues submitted, .that tbe defendant contracted to sell and tbe plaintiff contracted to buy tbe lands referred to in tbe complaint and included in tbe survey set out in tbe complaint; that tbe defendant represented to tbe plaintiff and guaranteed bim that there were 100 acres in tbe tract, and tbe plaintiff, sd believing, was induced to contract to pay therefor $5,850; that, in fact, tbe tract contained only 78 3-100 acres; that tbe plaintiff would not have bought tbe lands if be bad known at tbe time that tbe area was less than 80 acres; that…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Nissen v. Genesee Gold Mining Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
  2. Porter v. Western North Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
  3. Sherrill v. . HaganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
  4. Turrentine v. . Richmond Davidson RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
  5. Mitchell v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1883

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Bethell v. . McKinneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
  2. Bass v. DehnerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1939
  3. Hoots v. CalawaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  4. Galloway v. . GoolsbySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
  5. Palmer v. . LowderSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914

13 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