Capitol Funds, Inc. v. White

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Capitol Funds, Inc. v. White

306 S.E.2d 142, 63 N.C. App. 785, 1983 N.C. App. LEXIS 3193

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedSeptember 6, 1983

DocketNo. 8226SC730

StatusPublished

This text of 306 S.E.2d 142 (Capitol Funds, Inc. v. White) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Capitol Funds, Inc. v. White, 306 S.E.2d 142, 63 N.C. App. 785, 1983 N.C. App. LEXIS 3193 (N.C. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

PHILLIPS, Judge.

The judgment appealed from was erroneously entered. It is not the law that an existing lease of real property must be formally cancelled or terminated before the property can be validly leased to another. An oral agreement to rescind or terminate an existing lease is valid. “The statute of frauds applies to the making of enforceable contracts to sell or convey land, not to their abrogation.” Scott v. Jordan, 235 N.C. 244, 248, 69 S.E. 2d 557, 560 (1952). The agreed statement of facts indicates that the prior tenant was willing to cancel the lease and vacate the premises at any time and its occupancy after 1 August 1979 was with defendant’s consent and for the purpose of accomplishing repairs that defendant wanted. If the jury so finds, the lease sued upon is enforceable by law.

Defendant’s decision to repudiate the lease was apparently precipitated by the prior tenant’s failure to promptly complete the repairs that defendant desired. In sending the case back for a new trial, we point out that according to the evidence the plaintiff had no responsibility at all for the repairs or any delays that occurred in connection with them. In the lease, defendant agreed to accept the building as it was and the evidence plainly shows that the repairs involved were made at his request. Thus, any delay that occurred was defendant’s responsibility and irrelevant to plaintiffs case.

[787]*787Reversed.

Judges Hill and Johnson concur.

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

PHILLIPS, Judge.

The judgment appealed from was erroneously entered. It is not the law that an existing lease of real property must be formally cancelled or terminated before the property can be validly leased to another. An oral agreement to rescind or terminate an existing lease is valid. “The statute of frauds applies to the making of enforceable contracts to sell or convey land, not to their abrogation.” Scott v. Jordan, 235 N.C. 244, 248, 69 S.E. 2d 557, 560 (1952). The agreed statement of facts indicates that the prior tenant was willing to cancel the lease and vacate the premises at any time and its occupancy after 1 August 1979 was with defendant’s consent and for the purpose of accomplishing repairs that defendant wanted. If the jury so finds, the lease sued upon is enforceable by law.

Defendant’s decision to repudiate the lease was apparently precipitated by the prior tenant’s failure to promptly complete the repairs that defendant desired. In sending the case back for a new trial, we point out that according to the evidence the plaintiff had no responsibility at all for the repairs or any delays that occurred in connection with them. In the lease, defendant agreed to accept the building as it was and the evidence plainly shows that the repairs involved were made at his request. Thus, any delay that occurred was defendant’s responsibility and irrelevant to plaintiffs case.

[787]*787Reversed.

Judges Hill and Johnson concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

306 S.E.2d 142, 63 N.C. App. 785, 1983 N.C. App. LEXIS 3193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/capitol-funds-inc-v-white-ncctapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack