White v. White
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
BROCK, Chief Judge.
The district court concluded as a matter of law that the November 17th Consent Judgment constituted a contract between plaintiff and defendant; that the agreement would be destroyed by a modification of the support provision inasmuch as the support and property distribution provisions constituted reciprocal consideration and were not separable; and that the November 17th Consent Judgment was not subject to modification without the consent of both parties. We cannot affirm these conclusions based upon the record which was before the district court and which is now before us.
I…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Bunn v. BunnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- Plumer v. PlumerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- Dimarco v. DimarcoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
- Movius v. MoviusMontana Supreme Court · 1974
- Scanlon v. ScanlonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1955
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Acosta v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
- White v. WhiteCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978