Cromartie v. Colby

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Cromartie v. Colby

108 S.E.2d 228, 250 N.C. 224, 1959 N.C. LEXIS 624

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedApril 29, 1959

Docket244

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 108 S.E.2d 228 (Cromartie v. Colby) 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

Cromartie v. Colby, 108 S.E.2d 228, 250 N.C. 224, 1959 N.C. LEXIS 624 (N.C. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

"■ WiNBORNE, C. J.

Taking the evidence in the instant case offered upon the trial in Superior Court in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and giving to him the benefit of -all reasonable inferences tó be 'drawn therefrom, this Court holds that it is 'Sufficient to make a case for the jury in accordance with the facts alleged in the complaint.

It is enough to refer to what is said in Trust Co. v. Goode, 164 N.C. 19, 80 S.E. 62. The headnote there epitomizes the principle there set forth in this manner: “While real -property remains in the hands of a' broker for the purpose of sale, the owner may not consummate the sale with one who had become interested as a proposed purchaser through the efforts of 'the broker, and escape liability to the letter for the payment of the commissions agreed upon; land where in 'an -action by the broker to recover his commissions, there is conflicting evidence, ■but the evidence viewed in the light moat favorable to the plaintiff’s Contentions tends to establish a transaction of this character, a judgment as of nonsuit upon the evidence should not be granted.” Such seems to be the case in hand.

And as the case must be returned to the Superior Court for a new tidal, the Court refrains from discussing the evidence.

' Hence for reasons stated, the judgment as of nonsuit entered below -is hereby

Reversed.

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

"■ WiNBORNE, C. J.

Taking the evidence in the instant case offered upon the trial in Superior Court in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and giving to him the benefit of -all reasonable inferences tó be 'drawn therefrom, this Court holds that it is 'Sufficient to make a case for the jury in accordance with the facts alleged in the complaint.

It is enough to refer to what is said in Trust Co. v. Goode, 164 N.C. 19, 80 S.E. 62. The headnote there epitomizes the principle there set forth in this manner: “While real -property remains in the hands of a' broker for the purpose of sale, the owner may not consummate the sale with one who had become interested as a proposed purchaser through the efforts of 'the broker, and escape liability to the letter for the payment of the commissions agreed upon; land where in 'an -action by the broker to recover his commissions, there is conflicting evidence, ■but the evidence viewed in the light moat favorable to the plaintiff’s Contentions tends to establish a transaction of this character, a judgment as of nonsuit upon the evidence should not be granted.” Such seems to be the case in hand.

And as the case must be returned to the Superior Court for a new tidal, the Court refrains from discussing the evidence.

' Hence for reasons stated, the judgment as of nonsuit entered below -is hereby

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

108 S.E.2d 228, 250 N.C. 224, 1959 N.C. LEXIS 624, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cromartie-v-colby-nc-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack