Yancey v. Watkins, 739SC175
Decision Date | 14 March 1973 |
Docket Number | No. 739SC175,739SC175 |
Citation | 17 N.C.App. 515,195 S.E.2d 89 |
Court | North Carolina Court of Appeals |
Parties | T. H. YANCEY et al. v. Louise H. WATKINS, Widow, Executrix of the Estate of G. B. Watkins, and Individually. |
Royster & Royster by T. S. Royster, Jr., Oxford, and Perry, Kittrell, Blackburn & Blackburn by Charles F. Blackburn, Henderson, for plaintiff appellees.
Watkins, Edmundson & Wilkinson by Charles Wilkinson, Oxford, and Banzet & Banzet by Frank Banzet, Warrenton, for defendant appellant.
Defendant contends first that this action as a matter of law is barred by the three years statute of limitations which statute she properly pleaded. We disagree.
An agreement to sell or purchase real property is governed by the general law of contracts. 7 Strong, N.C.Index 2d, Vendor and Purchaser, § 1, p. 489. 'Where an option or contract to purchase does not specify the time within which the right to buy may be exercised, the right must be exercised within a reasonable time.' Ibid, § 2, p. 492.
In Lewis v. Allred, 249 N.C. 486, 106 S.E.2d 689 (1959), Denny, J. (later C.J.) quoting from 49 Am.Jur., Statute of Frauds, § 356, p. 667 said:
* * *"
Ordinarily, the bar of the statute of limitations is a mixed question of law and fact. But where the bar is properly pleaded and All the facts with reference thereto are admitted the question of limitations becomes a matter of law. Poultry Co. v. Oil Co., 272 N.C. 16, 157 S.E.2d 693 (1967); Mobley v. Broome, 248 N.C. 54, 102 S.E.2d 407 (1958).
In Etheridge v. R.R., 209 N.C. 326, 183 S.E. 539 (1936), we find:
While it is a maxim of Engligh law that 'how long a 'reasonable time' ought to be is not defined in law, but is left with the discretion of the judge' (Coke Litt. 50), this applies only where the facts are admitted, or clearly proved, and 'Where the question of reasonable time is a debatable one, it must be referred to the jury for decision.' Hoke, J., in Holden v. Royall, 169 N.C., 676, 678, 86 S.E. 583, 584, p. 541, said: 'And, in this state authority is to the effect that, where this question of reasonable time is a debatable one, it must be referred to the jury for decision. (Citations.)
In Trust Co. v. Insurance Co., 199 N.C. 465, 154 S.E. 743 (1930), we find:
In Claus v. Lee, 140 N.C. 552, 53 S.E. 433 (1906), the court said:
While supporting the principle that determination of 'reasonable time' is generally a mixed question of law and fact and thus for the jury, there are cases which hold that When facts are simple and admitted and only one inference can be drawn, the determination of 'reasonable time' is a question of law. See Colt v. Kimball, 190 N.C. 169, 129 S.E. 406 (1925); Huff v. R.R., 171 N.C. 203, 88 S.E. 344 (1916); and Holden v. Royall, 169 N.C. 676, 86 S.E. 583 (1915).
Applying the quoted...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
McCutchen v. McCutchen
...judgment ... [is] appropriate." Brantley v. Dunstan, 10 N.C.App. 706, 706, 179 S.E.2d 878, 878 (1971); see also Yancey v. Watkins, 17 N.C.App. 515, 519, 195 S.E.2d 89, 92 (1973) ("[W]here the [bar] is properly pleaded and all facts with reference thereto are admitted, the question of limita......
-
Williams v. Houses of Distinction Inc.
...against Defendant. “Ordinarily, the bar of the statute of limitations is a mixed question of law and fact.” Yancey v. Watkins, 17 N.C.App. 515, 519, 195 S.E.2d 89, 92, cert. denied, 283 N.C. 394, 196 S.E.2d 277 (1973). Only when “the law is properly pleaded and all the facts with reference ......
-
Udzinski v. Lovin
...of limitations which is a matter of law. Poultry Co. v. Oil Co., 272 N.C. 16, 21, 157 S.E.2d 693, 697 (1967); Yancey v. Watkins, 17 N.C.App. 515, 519, 195 S.E.2d 89, 92,cert. denied,283 N.C. 394, 196 S.E.2d 277 (1973). Here, the issue is whether the trial court properly dismissed the compla......
-
E. Carolina Masonry, Inc. v. Weaver Cooke Constr., LLC, 5:15-CV-252-BR
...in adversary proceedings)."Ordinarily, the bar of the statute of limitations is a mixed question of law and fact." Yancey v. Watkins, 17 N.C.App. 515, 519, 195 S.E.2d 89, 92, cert. denied, 283 N.C. 394, 196 S.E.2d 277 (1973). Only when "the law is properly pleaded and all the facts with ref......