Dozier v. Wood
Decision Date | 18 September 1935 |
Docket Number | No. 26.,26. |
Citation | 181 S.E. 336,208 N. C. 414 |
Parties | DOZIER. v. WOOD. |
Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Currituck County; Cranmer, Judge.
Action by H. G. Dozier against W. P. Wood. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.
Reversed.
Civil action to recover for fertilizer and supplies sold by plaintiff and used by tenants on defendant's farm.
The plaintiff is a merchant in Currituck county. The defendant is a resident of Pasquotank county and the owner of a farm in Currituck, which was rented to W. E. Davis and W. B. Davis, on shares, during the year 1931.
On January 13, 1931, the defendant, in company with his tenants, had a conversation with the plaintiff relative to supplies for the farm.
Plaintiff testified:
W. E. Davis testified: "I heard Mr. Wood tell him that he would see that he was taken care of."
W. B. Davis testified: "Mr. Wood told Mr. Dozier that he would see he got his money for anything furnished us."
From a judgment of nonsuit entered at the close of plaintiff's evidence, he appeals, assigning errors.
C. R. Morris, of Currituck, and John H. Hall, of Elizabeth City, for appellant.
McMullan & McMullan, of Elizabeth City, for appellee.
Little can or need be added to what was said in the two opinions filed in the case of Peele v. Powell, 156 N. C. 553, 73 S. E. 234, on rehearing 161 N. C. 50, 76 S. E. 698, on the difference between an original promise, which is not within the statute of frauds, and a superadded one, which is within the statute. C. S. § 987. The difference in statement is clear enough. Difficulty often arises, however, in determining whether the evidence in a given case places it in the one category or the other. Gennett v. Lyerly, 207 N. C. 201, 176 S. E. 275; Garren v. Youngblood, 207 N. C. 86, 176 S. E. 252, 95 A. L. R. 1132. The solution, in such instances, generally lies in summoning the aid of a jury. Whitehurst v. Padgett, 157 N. C. 424, 73 S. E. 240. And so, in the instant case, we think the evidence is susceptible of an interpretation which requires its submission to the twelve....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Foil
...sought to be accomplished. Simmons v. Groom, 167 N.C. 271, 83 S.E. 471; Balentine v. Gill, 218 N.C. 496, 11 S.E.2d 456; Dozier v. Wood, 208 N.C. 414, 181 S.E. 336. Where the intent is doubtful, and solution usually lies in summoning the aid of a jury. Whitehurst v. Padgett, 157 N.C. 424, 73......
-
Balentine v. Gill
... ... with Gill. The two are separate and distinct. The one is not ... within the statute ... [11 S.E.2d 458] ... of frauds; the other is. Dozier v. Wood, 208 N.C ... 414, 181 S.E. 336; Taylor v. Lee, 187 N.C. 393, 121 ... S.E. 659. Neither Warren nor Gill is a party to the ... other's ... ...
-
Baker v. Malan Const. Corp., 19
...156 N.C. 553, 73 S.E. 234, Id., on rehearing, 161 N.C. 50, 76 S.E. 698; Whitehurst v. Padgett, 157 N.C. 424, 73 S. E. 240; Dozier v. Wood, 208 N.C. 414, 181 S.E. 336; Taylor v. Lee, 187 N.C. 393, 121 S.E. 659; Tarkington v. Criffield, 188 N.C. 140, 124 S.E. 129; Warren v. White, 251 N.C. 72......
-
Beck v. Hooks
... ... even where it is contradictory that part of it which is most ... favorable to the plaintiff must prevail. Dozier v ... Wood, 208 N.C. 414, 181 S.E. 336; Matthews v ... Cheatham, 210 N.C. 592, 188 S.E. 87; Gunn v. Taxi ... Co., 212 N.C. 540, 193 S.E ... ...