{
  "id": 8524860,
  "name": "VERNON F. HOWELL v. DONALD RAY WATERS",
  "name_abbreviation": "Howell v. Waters",
  "decision_date": "1988-04-19",
  "docket_number": "No. 872SC1043",
  "first_page": "721",
  "last_page": "722",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "89 N.C. App. 721"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.",
    "id": 14983,
    "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "161 S.E. 2d 131",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1968,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "273 N.C. 701",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8576097
      ],
      "year": 1968,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/273/0701-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "81 S.E. 2d 138",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1954,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "240 N.C. 35",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8594774
      ],
      "year": 1954,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/240/0035-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "351 S.E. 2d 747",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1987,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "318 N.C. 694",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        4738404,
        4737929,
        4740404,
        4738486,
        4734713
      ],
      "year": 1987,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/318/0694-03",
        "/nc/318/0694-02",
        "/nc/318/0694-05",
        "/nc/318/0694-01",
        "/nc/318/0694-04"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "347 S.E. 2d 65",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1986,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "82 N.C. App. 481",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8359232
      ],
      "year": 1986,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/82/0481-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 231,
    "char_count": 2803,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.78,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.205543064479821
    },
    "sha256": "dcfe48b11670f8f8b18c324fea2f72d2270ffa09fbe34e511a5afa2c43a9ad17",
    "simhash": "1:8b99426b66801ddf",
    "word_count": 462
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:39:00.818604+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Chief Judge HEDRICK and Judge EAGLES concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "VERNON F. HOWELL v. DONALD RAY WATERS"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PHILLIPS, Judge.\nIn January, 1979 defendant deeded approximately 480 acres of Beaufort County land to plaintiff. Based upon allegations that the boundaries of the tract are not as defendant\u2019s agent represented them to be plaintiff seeks to rescind or reform the deed on the grounds of fraud or mistake; not mutual mistake, though, but his unilateral mistake caused or known about by the seller, as laid down in this case when it was here before. Howell v. Waters, 82 N.C. App. 481, 347 S.E. 2d 65 (1986), disc. rev. denied, 318 N.C. 694, 351 S.E. 2d 747 (1987); Restatement (Second) of Contracts Sec. 153 (1981). Upon the case being retried after the first appeal the jury rendered verdict against plaintiff and judgment was entered thereon.\nIn appealing plaintiff makes only one contention \u2014 that the court committed reversible error in failing to submit \u201cissues on fraud to the jury\u201d as he requested. Assuming arguendo that it was error not to submit plaintiffs requested fraud issues plaintiff could not have been prejudiced thereby because the jury\u2019s answers to the issues that were submitted establish that plaintiffs fraud claim has no basis. For in answering the issues the jury found, inter alia, that (1) defendant neither knew of nor caused plaintiff s mistaken belief as to the tract boundaries; and (2) plaintiffs reliance upon the agent\u2019s representations was not reasonable. These findings were fatal to plaintiffs fraud claim for reasons that the law of that subject make self-evident. See Lamm v. Crumpler, 240 N.C. 35, 81 S.E. 2d 138 (1954); 37 C.J.S. Fraud Sec. 3 (1943). Since the issues submitted were comprehensive enough to resolve the fraud claim additional issues on that claim were not required. Johnson v. Lamb, 273 N.C. 701, 161 S.E. 2d 131 (1968).\nNo error.\nChief Judge HEDRICK and Judge EAGLES concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PHILLIPS, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Pritchett, Cooke & Burch, by Stephen R. Burch and W. W. Pritchett, Jr., for plaintiff appellant.",
      "John A. Wilkinson for defendant appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "VERNON F. HOWELL v. DONALD RAY WATERS\nNo. 872SC1043\n(Filed 19 April 1988)\nCancellation and Rescission of Instruments \u00a7 10.1\u2014 reformation of deed \u2014 insufficient evidence of fraud\nIn an action to rescind or reform a deed on the grounds of fraud or mistake, the trial court did not commit reversible error by failing to submit requested issues of fraud to the jury since the jury\u2019s answers to the issues which were submitted established that plaintiffs fraud claim had no basis in that the jury found that defendant neither knew of nor caused plaintiffs mistaken belief as to the tract boundaries, and plaintiffs reliance upon the agent\u2019s representations was not reasonable.\nAppeal by plaintiff from Lewis, John B., Jr., Judge. Judgment entered 7 July 1987 in Superior Court, BEAUFORT County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 5 April 1988.\nPritchett, Cooke & Burch, by Stephen R. Burch and W. W. Pritchett, Jr., for plaintiff appellant.\nJohn A. Wilkinson for defendant appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0721-01",
  "first_page_order": 749,
  "last_page_order": 750
}