From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Oil Co. v. Moore

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Mar 1, 1928
141 S.E. 926 (N.C. 1928)

Opinion

(Filed 14 March, 1928.)

Trial — Motion to Nonsuit — Evidence Held Sufficient to Go to Jury.

It is error to grant a judgment as of nonsuit in plaintiff's action to recover for goods sold and delivered when there is evidence tending to show that a check marked paid, introduced in the trial, did not cover the transaction, though upon its face it purports to be "in full of all accounts to date." Refining Corporation v. Sanders, 190 N.C. 203, and other cases cited as controlling.

APPEAL by plaintiff from Cranmer, J., at December Term, 1927, of LENOIR.

Cowper, Whitaker Allen for plaintiff.

F. E. Wallace and Shaw Jones for defendants.


Civil action to recover $631.05, with interest, for goods sold by plaintiff and delivered to defendants on what is styled the "Columbia account."

The defendants offered in evidence a check for $3,681.98, made payable to the plaintiff, bearing notation: "Payment in full of all accounts to date," and contended that the account in suit was covered by said payment.

But there was evidence that this check was given to plaintiff's agent at Kinston and that it only covered accounts in his district, which did not include the Columbia account.

From a judgment of nonsuit entered at the close of all the evidence the plaintiff appeals.


Reversed on authority of Refining Corporation v. Sanders, 190 N.C. 203, 129 S.E. 607, and Bogert v. Mfg. Co., 172 N.C. 248, 90 S.E. 208.

Reversed.


Summaries of

Oil Co. v. Moore

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Mar 1, 1928
141 S.E. 926 (N.C. 1928)
Case details for

Oil Co. v. Moore

Case Details

Full title:STANDARD OIL COMPANY v. W. C. MOORE ET AL

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Mar 1, 1928

Citations

141 S.E. 926 (N.C. 1928)
141 S.E. 926

Citing Cases

Youngblood v. Taylor

Defendant pleads this check in bar of plaintiff's claim, under the principle of accord and satisfaction as…

Lochner v. Sales Service

There was evidence in behalf of the plaintiff that commissions on sales and collections were payable weekly…