169 F.2d 776 - Waller v. Waller — 169 F.2d 776

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently September 1973 · most notably United States v. Nelson (1969), Hernandez v. United States (1962)

25 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

¶1Lycurgus R. Varser, of Lumberton, N. C., for appellant.

¶2Isaac C. Wright, of Wilmington, N. C. (Edward K. Proctor and Walter H. Powell, both of Whiteville, N. C., on the brief), for appellees.

¶3Before DOBIE, Circuit Judge, PRET-TYMAN, Associate Justice of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (sitting by special assignment), and BARKSDALE, District Judge.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5This was a civil action, brought in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, to establish a parol trust in a certain designated parcel of realty.

¶6The case was tried by the District Judge, sittihg as a) chajncellor without a jury. The District Judge, after hearing the evidence, made findings of fact and set out appropriate conclusions of law. These, on all important points, were uniformly unfavorable to the plaintiff-appellant herein.

¶7Conclusion of law number one was:

¶8“The title of A. E. Waller to tract No. 3 was not impressed with any trust in favor of J. B. Waller, as alleged in the complaint.”

¶9Conclusion of law number two' was:

¶10“Whatever rights accrued to J. B. Waller by virtue of A. E. Waller’s promise to convey tract No. 3 to him upon his payment of his portion of the original indebtedness have been lost, and the plaintiff is barred of any right of action thereon by reason of his failure -to make any. payment tO' A. E. Waller, and by his delay in bringing this action for more than ten years after the registration of deed for tract No. 3 from A. E. Waller to J. M. Turner and Neva Turner.”

¶11These conclusions, which are more than ample to .dispose of the case, were, we think, clearly correct and they found ample support in the evidence.

¶12The judgment of the District Court is accordingly affirmed.

¶13Affirmed.