Case Name: J. T. LAMM v. ALBERT B. LAMM
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1934-03-21
Citations: 206 N.C. 905
Docket Number: 
Parties: J. T. LAMM v. ALBERT B. LAMM.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 206
Pages: 905–906

Head Matter:
J. T. LAMM v. ALBERT B. LAMM.
(Filed 21 March, 1934.)
Appeal by plaintiff from Barnhill, J., at November Term, 1933, of WilsoN.
Affirmed.
This is an action brought by plaintiff against defendant to recover the sum of $1,400 for breach of contract and also on quantum meruit. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant, his father-in-law, had about 56 acres of land in low state of cultivation and in the beginning of the year 1918, be agreed with him that if be would build a bouse and improve tbe land, be would convey tbe land to him in fee simple. That be performed bis part of tbe contract in about one year, and expended some $1,400. That tbe defendant breached bis contract by deeding tbe land in fee simple on 18 December, 1931, to one Sid Page and be bad to surrender tbe land to him. Tbe defendant pleaded tbe three-year statute of limitation.
Finch, Rani & Finch and David W. Isear for plaintiff.
W. A. Lucas for defendant.

Opinion:
Per Cubiam.
Tbe court below at tbe close of plaintiff's evidence sustained a motion made by defendant for judgment as in case of non-suit. C. S., 561. In this we can see no error. Tbe defendant practically each year promised to make title to plaintiff, but never did so. Plaintiff testified: "After I built tbe buildings I asked him for a deed. At that time be was having a line dispute with an adjoining landowner and be told me there was a little corner and be did not know who would draw it. His sister might draw it. He said be might get it. That was tbe reason be put me off tbe first time and be kept putting me off each year. . . . He refused every time I made a demand on him. I was in possession of tbe place thirteen or fourteen years. I paid taxes on it. I bad it cultivated."
Tbe present case is distinguishable from Vann v. Newsom, 110 N. C., 122. Tbe judgment below is
Affirmed.