Ferguson v. . Ferguson

178 S.E. 845, 208 N.C. 67, 1935 N.C. LEXIS 319

Opinion

Stacy, O. J.

This is the same case that was before us at the Spring Term, 1934, opinion filed 2 May, and reported in 206 N. C., 483, 174 S. E., 304.

The real purpose of the action is to have the deed in question surrendered up and canceled for alleged breach of the conditions precedent to vesting of title. Upon sharply conflicting evidence the jury finds that the defendant has thus far complied with his part of the contract. His continued performance, or whether he will ultimately be entitled to the land, is not presently at issue. Craddock v. Barnes, 142 N. C., 89, 54 S. E., 1003. The verdict settles the controversy up to now. We have discovered no sufficient reason-for disturbing the result. Hence, the verdict and judgment will be upheld.

No error.

SoheNCK, J., took no' part in the consideration or decision of this case.