{
  "id": 8653430,
  "name": "LOUIS GOODMAN v. A. J. ROBBINS",
  "name_abbreviation": "Goodman v. Robbins",
  "decision_date": "1920-10-27",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "239",
  "last_page": "240",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "180 N.C. 239"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "128 N. C., 565",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "137 N. C., 397",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8656531
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/137/0397-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "139 N. C., 51",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8652059
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/139/0051-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "121 N. C., 410",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8653331
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/121/0410-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "83 N. C., 387",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11277946
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/83/0387-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "56 N. C., 9",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8683601
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/56/0009-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "98 N. C., 107",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11273464
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/98/0107-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "133 N. C., 260",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8657154
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/133/0260-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "90 N. C., 50",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8685186
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/90/0050-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 238,
    "char_count": 3039,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.454,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.259244762335987e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4328059280676209
    },
    "sha256": "4f8fef9f4f7e942ec7bd551919fcaa17aba6cd54b7de843e12624d8c54dfa5bc",
    "simhash": "1:4247aa5d70fe4ca0",
    "word_count": 517
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:30:08.757715+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "LOUIS GOODMAN v. A. J. ROBBINS."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "BeowN, J.\nThis action is brought by the plaintiff to compel the defendant to specifically perform three contracts for the purchase of land. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant purchased at auction sale the lands described in the complaint and after purchasing them he executed the contracts. To this the defendant made only a general denial, and did not allege the contracts were the result of a mutual mistake, or that they had been materially changed after he had signed them. The defendant admitted bidding in the land and signing the contracts, and his defense was a mistake, and that the plaintiff had fraudulently materially changed the contracts.\n\"When evidence was offered of mistake and fraud, the plaintiff objected upon the ground that no such defense was set up in the defendant\u2019s answer, and such defenses must be pleaded before evidence of this character would be admissible. The court excluded the evidence, and the defendant excepted. \u2022\nHis Honor\u2019s ruling was correct; an equitable defense such as was offered in this case must be pleaded. McLaurin v. Cronly, 90 N. C., 50; Locklear v. Bullard, 133 N. C., 260; Rountree v. Brinson, 98 N. C., 107.\nIt is contended that the description in the three contracts is insufficient to warrant the admission of parol evidence. The descriptions are very similar. \u00a5e will give only one: \u201cFarm No. 19,020, in block No.,. of the tract of land subdivided into tracts containing S5 and 56 acres belonging to Louis Goodman, and known as the Swain land.\u201d \u00a5e are of opinion that this description is sufficiently definite to enable the land to be located. Id certium, est quod certium reddi potest. Simmons v. Spruill, 56 N. C., 9; Farmer v. Batts, 83 N. C., 387; Rev., 948; Holmes v. Sapphire Co., 121 N. C., 410; Moore v. Fowle, 139 N. C., 51; Ward v. Gay, 137 N. C., 397.\nThe fact that the map was not registered is immaterial. Collins v. Land Co., 128 N. C., 565.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "BeowN, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "E. K. Bryant, George H. Howell, Joseph W. Ruarle, and G. Ed. Taylor for plaintiff.",
      "Robert W. Davis and Robert Ruarle for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "LOUIS GOODMAN v. A. J. ROBBINS.\n(Filed 27 October, 1920.)\n1. Pleadings \u2014 Contracts to Convey Lands \u2014 Mistake\u2014Fraud\u2014Equity.\nTbe defense to an action to enforce specific performance of a contract to convey land, that there was a mistake made therein, or that the plaintiff had fraudulently and materially changed it, is an equitable one, and it is necessary to be pleaded in order to be shown by the evidence.\n2. Deeds and Conveyances \u2014 Contracts\u2014 Descriptions\u2014 Evidence\u2014 Parol Evidence \u2014 Maps\u2014Plats.\nA description in a contract to convey land, \u201cFarm No. 19,020, in block No.of the tract of land subdivided into tracts containing 55 and 56 acres belonging to Louis Goodman and known as the Swain land,\u201d is sufficiently definite to admit of parol evidence of identification, and the \u2019registration of the map thereof is immaterial.\nCivil action, tried before Gui\u00f3n, J., at Special June Term, 1920, of BeuNswick.\nFrom a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff the defendant appealed.\nE. K. Bryant, George H. Howell, Joseph W. Ruarle, and G. Ed. Taylor for plaintiff.\nRobert W. Davis and Robert Ruarle for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0239-01",
  "first_page_order": 297,
  "last_page_order": 298
}