Ellis v. Vespoint
North Carolina Court of Appeals
403 S.E.2d 542, 102 N.C. App. 739 (1991)
- Written by Serena Lipski, JD
Facts
Queen Ellis owned approximately 40 acres of land. Queen had several children, including Clara Ellis Vespoint (defendant) as well as M. B. Ellis (Pete), Earl D. Ellis, Arthur F. Ellis, Frank D. Ellis, Dorothy Ellis Hall, Jessie Ellis Grimm, and Margaret Ellis Mondozzi (collectively, the other Ellis children) (plaintiffs). In 1962 Clara, Pete, and Frank approached Queen requesting a loan. Following some discussions, they all agreed that Queen would transfer title to her land to Clara, who would get a loan secured by the land. Clara agreed to ensure the loan was repaid and promised that if anything happened to Queen, the land would be divided equally among all the Ellis children. Queen transferred title to Clara, and Clara repaid the loan. Queen died in 1972. In 1988, following a dispute, Clara denied the existence of any oral trust. The other Ellis children filed suit against Clara, seeking their shares of the land. Over Clara’s objection, the trial court permitted Frank to testify about the discussions among Queen, Frank, Pete, and Clara regarding the oral trust even though Frank did not know the exact date of the discussions, only that they occurred before the transfer of the property. Clara moved for a directed verdict on two grounds: (1) the other Ellis children did not produce sufficient evidence of Queen’s intent to create a trust; and (2) the other Ellis children did not prove fraud, mistake, or undue influence. The trial court denied Clara’s motion, the jury found for the other Ellis children. Clara appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Greene, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.