The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1905-01-01
Supreme Court Digests.
(Reported by Jos. L. Seawell)

(Reported by JOS. l.. Seawell.)
Helms V. Helms. petitioner. Fro;r,
Union. Former ruling sustained
Equity will not divest an estate for
the breach of a condition precedent.
There is no estate, but a mere pos
sibility OF reverter, remaining in a
grantor who conveys a fee simple.
without reservation of rents. upon Il
conditions subsequent.
Where nominal consideration in q
deed in fee is followed by the fur
Their consideration of the support dur
ing the natural life Of the party of
the first part BY ne party of the sec
ond part, and that the land shall
stand good for the support" etc. Held
not to constitute condition preced-
ent.
Griffin, petitioner V. \. {. l.. Railroad
Co. From Halifax. Petition dis
missed.
An appellee's petition to rehear may
be dismissed for error in the trial be-
low which was not considered in the
first opinion of the court.
Ii is error to add to an instruction
as to negligence in alghting from a
moving train, the words unless the
plaintiff was commanded or invited by
the porter to alight while the train
was moving" when there was no evil
dence that the train was moving and
plaintiff himself testified that when the
porter told him TO get off the train
had stopped.
SatterthWaite V. Goodyear, appellant.
From Haywood. Error.
A letter accepting the terms of a
contract completes the contract on the
day the letter is mailed.
Where the owner of land accepted
by letter the terms of sale offered
by a real estate agent provided a sale
i Il Il ff.ass
the agent had failed to sell within that
time the owner sold the land himself
to the agents proposed purchaser, the
agent cannot recover commissions.
AS the jury respond to issues and
do not render a general verdict, it IS
proper to refuse prayers for instruc-
tons which conclude with plaintiff is
Pinchbacl1 V. Mining & Mfg. Co.. ap-
pellant From Castor. New trial.
Equity will correct a deed TO make
it comport to an admitted or proved
agreement in accordance with which
the deed was to be made.
Equity will not compel the convey
ance Of IL doubtful title but will order
additional parties. a determination OF
whose interests, will settle the title.
Where q deed from one coTporatior
to another rccited resolutions of the
grantor and grantee which showed
| clearly the intent of the grantor to
convey and of the grantee to buy all
the real and personal property Of the
grantor and there was evidence that an
exception of certain lots from the
operation of the deed was due to an
erroneous statement from an officer OF
the grantor that the lots had been
previously conveyed, the equity for a
correction of the deed cannot be re-
PEELED by parol evidence of a change
in the intention Of the parties from
that recited in the deed and consistent
with the exception therein, unless it is
clearly shown that such change was
made by all of the stockholders of the
grantor and grantee.
Hall. appellant V. Miscnhcimcr. From
Rowan. No error.
A receipt for part payment of the
price of land intended as evidence OF
contract to purchase, is sufficiently
signed by the vendee If he directs his
name to be inserted in the receipt rs
having paid the money. Cherry ".
Long, 81 n. c.. 466.
To charge one by his contract TO
purchase land. there must be writing
which contains expressly or by impli-
cation the material terms of the al
legged agreement and signed by the
person intended to be bound.
Section 1854 of The Code, requiring
contract for the sale of land or some
memorandum thereof to be in writing
applies as much to the vendeo as the
vendor and may therefore be pleaded
by a vendee who is called on to per
form his part of the alleged contract.
Taylor V. Russell. 119 n. c., 80. over
ruled and Green V. Railroad. II N. c.,
50. explained
The rule that the considerations of a
contract for sale Of land need not be
shown applies only when the contract
lis attempted to be enforced by the
vendor.
A receipt for money received in part
payment Of a house and lot and men
tioning the name of the person max
ing the payment but not the purchase
price constitutes neither d valid writ
ten agreement for the sale of land nor
a memorandum thereof
Goodwin V. Clayton and the Reynolds
Tobacco Co.. garnishee. Appeal by
defendants. From Forsyth Error.
' A resident of foreign state was