Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1929

Folger v. . Clark

Folger v. . Clark
Supreme Court of North Carolina · Decided December 4, 1929 · Stacy
150 S.E. 618; 198 N.C. 44; 1929 N.C. LEXIS 403 (South Eastern Reporter)

Folger v. . Clark

Opinion of the Court

Stacy, C. J.

The plaintiff has failed to show any loss due to the defendants’ negligence. True, he did not get the dividend in question, but there is no evidence that the price of the stock was not thereby reduced. The testimony of defendants’ agent would seem to indicate that it was. At any rate, we have discovered no evidence on the record of loss suffered by the plaintiff which may reasonably be said to be proximately attributable to the negligence of the defendants. Plaintiff to'ok the stock and never offered to rescind the contract of purchase. There is no allegation of fraud in the transaction. McNair v. Finance Co., 191 N. C., 710, 133 S. E., 85; Pritchard v. Dailey, 168 N. C., 330, 84 S. E., 392.

Of course, a broker is liable in damages for fraud or negligence which results in injury to.his customer, but no measurable tort liability has been shown on the present record. 4 R. C. L., 285.

Reversed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.