Beck v. . Halliwell

163 S.E. 927, 202 N.C. 846, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 272
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedApril 27, 1932
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 163 S.E. 927 (Beck v. . Halliwell) 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
Beck v. . Halliwell, 163 S.E. 927, 202 N.C. 846, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 272 (N.C. 1932).

Opinion

*847 . Pee Cubiam.

There was evidence at the trial of this action tending to show that defendant is liable to the plaintiff as an original promisor for the purchase price of the goods delivered by plaintiff to the corporation in which defendant was a stockholder. “It is too well settled to require the citation of sustaining authorities that the statute of frauds does not apply to the original promises or undertakings, though the benefit accrues to another than the promisor.” Hospital Association v. Hobbs, 153 N. C., 188, 69 S. E., 79.

Defendant’s motion for judgment as of nonsuit was properly denied. The judgment is affirmed.

No error.

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

Related

Warren v. White
112 S.E.2d 522 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1960)
Vanderbilt Tire & Rubber Corp. v. Bowen
75 S.E.2d 159 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1953)
Gennett v. . Lyerly
176 S.E. 275 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1934)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
163 S.E. 927, 202 N.C. 846, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 272, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beck-v-halliwell-nc-1932.