Northside Station Associates v. Maddry

413 S.E.2d 319 (1992)

From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Northside Station Associates v. Maddry

North Carolina Court of Appeals
413 S.E.2d 319 (1992)

Facts

Northside Station Associates (Northside) (plaintiff) leased property to Stanley and Margaret Hryniuk for a term ending on June 30, 1989. Under the terms of the agreement, if the tenant remains in possession after the lease expires and does not execute a new lease, he becomes a tenant from month-to-month and must thereafter pay one-and-a-half times the rent indicated in the lease. Stanley later entered into a second agreement with Carolyn Maddry (defendant) wherein Maddry agreed to lease the property pursuant to the terms of the original agreement between Northside and the Hryniuks, for a term ending on June 30, 1989. The agreement was signed by Stanley and Maddry, but not by Margaret. When the lease term expired, Maddry remained in possession of the premises but did not execute a new lease and refused to make rent payments to Northside. Northside sued Maddry for the unpaid rent, contending that Maddry became a tenant from month-to-month under the terms of the original agreement and so was liable for one-and-a-half times the rent indicated in the lease. Maddry moved to dismiss. The trial court granted the motion, concluding that no privity of contract existed between Northside and Maddry, which would allow Northside to bring a direct action against Maddry, because the agreement between Stanley and Maddry was a sublease, and not an assignment. Northside appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Greene, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 798,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 798,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 798,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,200 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership