From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomas v. Bank

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jan 1, 1933
167 S.E. 66 (N.C. 1933)

Opinion

(Filed 4 January, 1933.)

APPEAL by plaintiff from MacRae, Special Judge, at June Special Term, 1932, of MECKLENBURG.

Scarborough Boyd and Fred. H. Hasty for plaintiff.

A. L. Quickel for defendant.


Civil action to recover damages, arising ex contractu, and tried upon the following issue:

"Did the plaintiff and defendant enter into an agreement for the sale of the property described in the complaint, as alleged in the complaint? Answer: No (by direction of the court)."

From judgment on the verdict, the plaintiff appeals, assigning errors.


In addition to being somewhat involved, the plaintiff's testimony falls short of establishing the contract as alleged, which would entitle him to recover for its breach. The case presents a simple question of the sufficiency of the evidence to warrant a recovery.

No error.


Summaries of

Thomas v. Bank

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jan 1, 1933
167 S.E. 66 (N.C. 1933)
Case details for

Thomas v. Bank

Case Details

Full title:O. G. THOMAS v. THE CHERRYVILLE NATIONAL BANK OF CHERRYVILLE, NORTH…

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Jan 1, 1933

Citations

167 S.E. 66 (N.C. 1933)
203 N.C. 864