Kinnard v. Mecklenburg Fair, Ltd.
| Decision Date | 02 December 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 52,52 |
| Citation | 271 S.E.2d 909,301 N.C. 522 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | Charles R. KINNARD, d/b/a Closet Enterprises, Inc. v. MECKLENBURG FAIR, LTD., Horace Wells, Mack Hunter, Ed Mattick, SandraHumphries. |
On appeal by defendant from the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, reported in 46 N.C.App. 725, 266 S.E.2d 14 (1980), which reversed the judgment of Snepp, Judge, entered at the 11 May 1979 Session of Superior Court, Mecklenburg County, granting defendant's motion for directed verdict at the close of plaintiff's evidence.
Plaintiff instituted this action to recover damages for breach of a lease agreement between Closet Enterprises, Inc., a corporation wholly owned by plaintiff, and Mecklenburg Fair, Ltd. Plaintiff is a promoter and used the leased premises on the Mecklenburg fairgrounds primarily to operate a flea market. Other events, such as gospel sings and wrestling events, were also held there, but the flea market appears to have been plaintiff's main business.
The lease agreement, signed on 26 June 1972 but effective 1 January 1972, set the base rental at $2000 per month. Additionally, defendant was entitled to receive certain percentages of the receipts for old business, new business and concessions. The agreement also required plaintiff to pay the utility bills for the leased premises. Plaintiff was behind in his rent at the time the lease agreement was signed, both in base and percentage receipts rent, but the amount was disputed. During the 26 June 1972 meeting of the corporate defendant's board of directors, at which the lease was signed, plaintiff agreed to make a $1200 payment to defendant at the end of the July Fourth weekend.
At the flea market held on that weekend defendant's caretaker-employee distributed a circular advertising a flea market with a name similar to that of plaintiff's flea market which was to operate at the fairgrounds at the same time and place as plaintiff's market and was to be under new management. When plaintiff saw the circulars he announced over the loudspeakers that his flea market was moving to a new location. Plaintiff testified that he had begun making arrangements to move his flea market in May 1972. On 3 July 1972 Horace Wells, president of the corporate defendant, demanded payment of the $1200 from plaintiff. Plaintiff refused to pay and was told to leave the grounds and not to return. When plaintiff attempted to leave later that evening, he found that the gates were locked and the locks had been changed. He saw the corporate defendant's caretaker outside the gate with what appeared to be a gun. Plaintiff then called the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Henry v. Deen
...be prejudiced by liberal amendment. See e.g. Kinnard v. Mecklenburg Fair, 46 N.C.App. 725, 266 S.E.2d 14, aff'd per curiam, 301 N.C. 522, 271 S.E.2d 909 (1980). The statute of limitations within which an action for negligent wrongful death The rule governing the relation back of amendments ......
-
Federal Land Bank of Columbia v. Lieben
...Munns, 82 N.C.App. 102, 345 S.E.2d 419 (1986); Kinnard v. Mecklenburg Fair, 46 N.C.App. 725, 266 S.E.2d 14, aff'd per curiam, 301 N.C. 522, 271 S.E.2d 909 (1980). In the present case, to be relevant on the issue of implied waiver, plaintiff's evidence must show that Lieben acted in a manner......
-
Chrisalis Properties, Inc. v. Separate Quarters, Inc.
...disc. rev. denied, 308 N.C. 194, 302 S.E.2d 248 (1983); Kinnard v. Mecklenburg Fair, 46 N.C.App. 725, 266 S.E.2d 14, aff'd, 301 N.C. 522, 271 S.E.2d 909 (1980). In the present case plaintiff did not move to amend its complaint until after the trial court had entered summary judgment for def......
-
McMillan v. Town of Tryon
...35 N.C.App. 231, 241 S.E.2d 119, cert. denied and appeal dismissed, 294 N.C. 736, 244 S.E.2d 154 (1978)), aff'd, 301 N.C. 522, 524, 271 S.E.2d 909, 910 (1980) (per curiam). In the case sub judice, plaintiffs filed their original complaint on 20 April 2007. On 14 January 2008, plaintiffs ame......