Legal Opinion

Murray v. Bensen Aircraft Corporation

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 14, 1963No. 449PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRodman, J.

The basic facts on which plaintiff relies to support his claim for damages are stated in his first cause of action and restated in his second cause.

Summarized, the facts stated in the second cause of action are:

Defendant, a domestic corporation has its place of business in Wake County, N. C.; it is “engaged in the business of designing, manufacturing and selling various aeronautical machines, devises, crafts and products associated with the aviation industry”; it designed, manufactured, and sold “a rotary-wing, one-man rotor-craft under the nomenclature and trade name of Bensen Model B-7…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Wyatt v. North Carolina Equipment CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  2. Enloe v. Charlotte Coca-Cola Bottling Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
  3. Bundy v. . Commercial Credit Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  4. Roomy v. Allstate Insurance CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  5. Shaw v. LeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Sutton v. DukeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  2. Bernick v. JurdenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  3. Birtha v. Stonemor, North Carolina, LLCCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2012
  4. Kinlaw v. Long Mfg. N.C., Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  5. Terry v. Double Cola Bottling CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964

16 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