Legal Opinion

Fawcett v. . Fawcett

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 5, 1926PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.

The appellant contends that the alleged contract between George D. Fawcett and T. G. Fawcett should have been excluded because it was against public policy, unsupported by a valuable consideration, and therefore void and of no effect. To this, position we cannot give our assent. Any benefit to the promisor or any loss or detriment to the promisee is a sufficient consideration to support a contract. In Brown v. Ray, 32 N. C., 72, it is said that to make a consideration it is not necessary that the person giving the promise should receive or expect to receive any benefit; it is sufficient if…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Exum v. LynchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  2. McKinnon v. McKinnonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1893
  3. Leaksville-Spray Institute v. MebaneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  4. Ricks v. WilsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
  5. Acme Manufacturing Co. v. McCormickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Warren v. Littleton Orange Crush Bottling Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  2. Walston v. TwifordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
  3. Basketeria Stores, Inc. v. Public Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  4. Anderson v. AtkinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  5. Bjornstad v. FishSupreme Court of Iowa · 1957

6 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