Legal Briefs Title And Citation: Suggs V. Case Study


Legal Briefs Title and Citation: Suggs v. Norris. No. 364 S.E. 2nd 159. Court of Appeals North Carolina. 2 February 1988

Type of Action: Civil and Contractual

Facts of the Case: Darlene Suggs cohabited with Norris, but remained unmarried. During their time together she worked with him as a partner in his produce business and, according to witnesses, was quite instrumental in the success of said business. Suggs also took care of Norris during his last years when he suffered he effects of chronic alcoholism. When Norris died, his heirs gave Suggs nothing.

Contentions of the Parties: Suggs sued the Norris estate for breach of implied contract. Norris' estate argues that any contract is void because cohabiting is against public...


The Court of Appeals upheld the verdict.
Reasoning: The issue was not one implying sexual relations or cohabitation, but whether there was an implied contract between Norris and Suggs. Since there was ample evidence of this implication, as well as Suggs' expertise and ability to prove her value n the business, the contract between them was assured. The Court upheld that there were enough facts in the original trial or the Jury to make an informed decision and there were enough indications for an implied contract between Suggs and Norris.

Rule of Law: Implied contracts are enforceable in numerous circumstances, regardless of…

Sources Used in Documents:

Works Cited

Suggs v. Norris. No. 364 S.E. 2nd 159. Court of Appeals North Carolina. 2 February 1988. Web. October 2013. <>.

United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez. No. 399 F. 3rd 924. Supreme Court of the United States. 26 June 2006. Web. October 2013. <>.

Cite this Document:

"Legal Briefs Title And Citation Suggs V " (2013, October 20) Retrieved June 13, 2024, from

"Legal Briefs Title And Citation Suggs V " 20 October 2013. Web.13 June. 2024. <>

"Legal Briefs Title And Citation Suggs V ", 20 October 2013, Accessed.13 June. 2024,

Related Documents

Issues Presented or Questions of Law: 1) Did the SBL agreement constitute the contract between the parties? 2) Was Plaintiffs' case barred by the parole evidence rule? 3) Should the trial court have sustained Defendants' demurrer to Plaintiffs' case? Holding / Rule of Law: 1) The SBL agreement did not constitute the contract between the parties. The contracts were formed when Plaintiffs accepted Defendants offer and tendered their consideration. Therefore, the SBL agreement and addendum

Legal Brief: Hotjox Magazine Facts: Mark Studley (Studley), an Olympic swimmer, was featured on the cover of Hotjox magazine, a magazine targeted primarily at gay males. The picture was in the public domain. The magazine cover had the headline "Olympic Hunks Exposed" and said, "12 Sizzling Centerfolds Ready to Score with You," "Holy Speedo! Hot Athletic Buns!" And "Mark Studley, Olympic 2000's Best Body." The only image of Studley inside the

Legal Brief: Anthony Labriola v. Pollard Group Anthony Alan Labriola v. Pollard Group, Inc., WA Supreme Court, 2004, No. 74002-0 Whether a 2002 noncompete agreement negotiated after the employee had been hired and without independent consideration is enforceable. SUBSTANTIVE FACTS: Five years after beginning employment as a sales person the employer required the employee sign a noncompete agreement in 2002. In exchange the employee was allowed to remain employed. After the noncompete agreement was signed

Legal Brief The author preparing this brief is asked to defend against the banning of a book on the grounds that it is obscene and thus it should be barred from sale and distribution in the public sphere. The laws and standards surrounding obscenity are vague, subjective and impossible to reliably and consistently enforce in a manner that is even-handed and objective. As such, the banning of a book, movie or

When neither elected to do so, however, there was a violation of the New York Penal Code, leading to the consideration of their guilt or innocence. Implications Under Article 20 of New York Penal Law While the condemnation of a victim is not a viable defense, the implications for Bluto and his obligations under Article 20 deserves exploration. Just as Duty of Retreat applied to Popeye and Olive, it likewise applied

Legal Briefs

Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Stedman Facts At issue is the fact that a person named Stedman drew a number of forged checks. The money belonged to the American Lung Association. However, Stedman appropriated the money for herself to the tune of about $130,000. The American Lung Association had an insurance policy to cover losses of this nature, at least to a degree. To that end, Traveler’s covered the losses of the American