Atwater v. . Hughes

140 S.E. 925, 194 N.C. 805, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 241
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedNovember 9, 1927
StatusPublished

This text of 140 S.E. 925 (Atwater v. . Hughes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Atwater v. . Hughes, 140 S.E. 925, 194 N.C. 805, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 241 (N.C. 1927).

Opinion

Plaintiff brought suit against the defendants on a promissory note. The defendants alleged that the note as drawn was payable one year after date, whereas there was an agreement between the parties that it should be payable three years after date, and asked for reformation of the note upon the ground of fraud, and as a cause of action against the plaintiff, set up a counterclaim for damages arising from misrepresentation in a sale of timber made by the plaintiff to the defendants, said note being part of the purchase price.

Issues of fraud and damage were submitted to the jury and answered against the defendants and in favor of the plaintiff for the face amount of said note with interest thereon.

From judgment upon the verdict the defendants appealed. This record presents solely and exclusively a question of fact. The cause was submitted to the jury upon a charge totally free from error. A consideration of the entire record unerringly leads to the conclusion that the rights of the parties have been determined in accordance with law.

No error. *Page 806

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
140 S.E. 925, 194 N.C. 805, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 241, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/atwater-v-hughes-nc-1927.