Jordan v. Chappel
99 S.E.2d 778, 246 N.C. 620, 1957 N.C. LEXIS 493
Opinion
The judgment of the court below is supported by the provisions of G.S. 1-47 (4) and the decisions of this Court construing said statute. Anderson v. Moore, 233 N.C. 299, 63 S.E. 2d 641; Hughes v. Oliver, 228 N.C. 680, 47 S.E. 2d 6; Crews v. Crews, 192 N.C. 679, 135 S.E. 784.
Likewise, the conclusion of law with respect to laches is sustained. Stell v. Trust Co., 223 N.C. 550, 27 S.E. 2d 524; Peedin v. Oliver, 222 N.C. 665, 24 S.E. 2d 519.
The judgment of the court below is
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Jordan v. Chappel, 99 S.E.2d 778, 246 N.C. 620, 1957 N.C. LEXIS 493 (N.C. 1957).
99 S.E.2d 778 (Jordan v. Chappel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Anderson v. Moore
63 S.E.2d 641 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1951)
Peedin v. . Oliver
24 S.E.2d 519 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1943)
Crews v. . Crews
135 S.E. 784 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1926)
Stell v. First-Citizens Bank & Trust Co.
27 S.E.2d 524 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1943)
Hughes v. Oliver
47 S.E.2d 6 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1948)