Legal Opinion

Hardy v. . Dahl

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 18, 1936PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

This is an action to recover damages for the death of the plaintiff’s intestate, alleged to have been caused by the wrongful and negligent acts of the defendant in purporting to treat said intestate while ill with diphtheria. The complaint is rather long and elaborate and the judge of the Superior Court held that some of the allegations of the complaint assailed by the motion should be stricken therefrom. To this portion of the order there was no exception. The judge, however, was evidently of the opinion that the other allegations of the complaint assailed by the motion to strike could…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Pemberton v. City of GreensboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Scott v. . BryanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  2. Hill v. . StansburySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  3. Parker v. Duke UniversitySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  4. Bynum v. . BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  5. Parlier v. DrumSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API