Gray v. . Worthington

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Gray v. . Worthington

183 S.E. 731, 209 N.C. 582, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 301

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedFebruary 26, 1936

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 183 S.E. 731 (Gray v. . Worthington) 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

Gray v. . Worthington, 183 S.E. 731, 209 N.C. 582, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 301 (N.C. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

The nonsuit is correct on two grounds: First, it appears that the alleged parol agreement is in conflict with the written contract to convey (Ins. Co. v. Morehead, ante, 174) ; and, second, the contract to convey is not enforceable as against purchasers for value who hold prior registered title. C. S., 3309; Combes v. Adams, 150 N. C., 64, 63 S. E., 186; Hood, Comr., v. Macclesfield Co., ante, 280.

This is the only question presented by the appeal.

Affirmed.

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

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