Woodbury v. . Evans

Citations

• 30 S.E. 2
• 122 N.C. 779
• 1898 N.C. LEXIS 350

Syllabus

<p>Action to Recover Purchase Price of Land — Vendor and Vendee — Contract Relating to Land — Fraudulent Representations — Shortage—Duty of Purchaser of Land — Directing Verdict — Best Evidence — Amendment of Pleadings.</p> <p>1. In all contracts for the sale of land it is the duty of the purchaser to guard himself against defects of title, quantity, encumbrance and the like, and if he suffer loss by his negligence the law will afford him no remedy, unless he has been misled by the fraudulent representations of the bargainor.</p> <p>2. In the trial of an action for the balance due on a contract for the purchase of land, standing timber and machinery in a lump, in which the number of acres of land to be conveyed was not mentioned, the gist of the defence was the fraudulent representations of the bargainor; Held, that it was not error to refuse to submit to the jury the question of shortage in the acreage since that was immaterial in the absence of fraud.</p> <p>3. Where, in the trial of an action for the balance due on a contract for the purchase of land, an issue of fraud was submitted and there was no evidence to sustain it, it was proper for the trial judge to direct the jury to answer the issue in the negative if they believed the evidence.</p> <p>4. It is not competent to prove by parol the existence of older and superior titles to land, since the grants and titles themselves are the best evidence.</p> <p>5. After the close of the evidence on the trial of an action for the recovery of the balance due for the purchase of land, the defendant moved to dismiss because the complaint did not allege the plaintiff’s ability, readiness and willingness to make the deed set out in the contract and to tender the same. The plaintiff was then allowed to amend his complaint so as to contain those averments. Held, that the allowance of the amendment was within the discretion of the Court (Clark’s Code, Section 273).</p>