Green v. Sherrod
105 N.C. 197
Opinion
after stating the facts: In Norris v. McLam, 104 N. C., 159, Justice Shepherd, delivering the opinion of the Court, says: “It is well settled, that in order to convert a deed, absolute on its face, into a mortgage, it must be alleged, and of course proved, that the clause of redemption was omitted by reason of ignorance, mistake, fraud, or undue advantage.” Egerton v. Jones, 102 N. C., 278.
There is no error. • Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Green v. Sherrod, 105 N.C. 197 (N.C. 1890).
105 N.C. 197 (Green v. Sherrod) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Davenport v. . Phelps
1 S.E.2d 824 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1939)
Waddell v. . Aycock
142 S.E. 10 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1928)
Jones v. . Norris
60 S.E. 714 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1908)
Helms v. Helms.
47 S.E. 415 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1904)
Sprague v. . Bond
20 S.E. 709 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1894)