Milliken Land Co. v. Hord

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Milliken Land Co. v. Hord

138 S.E. 926, 193 N.C. 852, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 501

DecidedMay 25, 1927

StatusPublished

This text of 138 S.E. 926 (Milliken Land Co. v. Hord) 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

Milliken Land Co. v. Hord, 138 S.E. 926, 193 N.C. 852, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 501 (N.C. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In his brief filed in this Court, counsel for defendant, who appealed from the judgment of the Superior Court, abandoned his exceptions Nos. 2, 4, and 5.

The remaining exceptions upon which assignments of error are based have been duly considered. They present no questions of law which *853 require discussion. They cannot be sustained. Issues tendered by defendant present the question as to whether or not there was a novation of the contract between plaintiff and defendant with respect to the sale of defendant’s land by plaintiff. The jury has found that there was such novation, and that neither plaintiff nor defendant is entitled to recover damages for breach of the contract as found by the jury. Upon these findings, plaintiff is entitled to recover upon the check, drawn by defendant and delivered to plaintiff after the sale, in settlement of the amount due in accordance with the terms of the contract.

The judgment is affirmed. We find

No error.

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

Per Curiam.

In his brief filed in this Court, counsel for defendant, who appealed from the judgment of the Superior Court, abandoned his exceptions Nos. 2, 4, and 5.

The remaining exceptions upon which assignments of error are based have been duly considered. They present no questions of law which *853 require discussion. They cannot be sustained. Issues tendered by defendant present the question as to whether or not there was a novation of the contract between plaintiff and defendant with respect to the sale of defendant’s land by plaintiff. The jury has found that there was such novation, and that neither plaintiff nor defendant is entitled to recover damages for breach of the contract as found by the jury. Upon these findings, plaintiff is entitled to recover upon the check, drawn by defendant and delivered to plaintiff after the sale, in settlement of the amount due in accordance with the terms of the contract.

The judgment is affirmed. We find

No error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

138 S.E. 926, 193 N.C. 852, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 501, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/milliken-land-co-v-hord-nc-1927.