Shepherd v. . Refining Company

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Shepherd v. . Refining Company

153 S.E. 927, 198 N.C. 824

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedMay 21, 1930

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 153 S.E. 927 (Shepherd v. . Refining Company) 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

Shepherd v. . Refining Company, 153 S.E. 927, 198 N.C. 824 (N.C. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The nonsuit was entered on the theory that the plaintiff had failed to show a contract in writing, or any memorandum or *825 note thereof, signed by the party to be charged therewith, or by some other person by him thereto lawfully authorized, which described the property with sufficient definiteness to admit of identification as required by C. S., 988. In this we find no error.

Affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

The nonsuit was entered on the theory that the plaintiff had failed to show a contract in writing, or any memorandum or *825 note thereof, signed by the party to be charged therewith, or by some other person by him thereto lawfully authorized, which described the property with sufficient definiteness to admit of identification as required by C. S., 988. In this we find no error.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

153 S.E. 927, 198 N.C. 824, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shepherd-v-refining-company-nc-1930.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack