1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. S.E.2d
  4. 69 S.E.2d
  5. 69 S.E.2d 29 (1952)
 

ROYSTER v. HANCOCK

No. 742.

69 S.E.2d 29 (1952)

235 N.C. 110

ROYSTER et al. v. HANCOCK.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 1, 1952.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

W. M. Hicks, Oxford, Ruark & Ruark, and Joseph C. Moore, Jr., all of Raleigh, for plaintiffs appellants.

T. G. Stem, Edward F. Taylor, Oxford, Marshall T. Spears, Durham, and Royster & Royster, Oxford, for defendant appellee.

VALENTINE, Justice.

The only question presented is, did plaintiffs make out a case sufficient to repel defendant's demurrer to the evidence and motion for judgment as of nonsuit? The facts impel an affirmative answer to this question.

The fact that the note in question is under seal raises the presumption of a good and sufficient consideration. Angier v. Howard, 94 N.C. 27; Wester v. Bailey, 118 N.C. 193, 24 S.E. 9; Lentz v. K. B. Johnson & Sons, 207 N...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases