Legal Opinion

Caldwell v. Deese

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 7, 1975No. 47PublishedCited by 231 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HUSKINS, Justice.

A party moving for summary judgment under Rule 56 has the burden of “clearly establishing the lack of any triable issue of fact by the record properly before the court. His papers are carefully scrutinized; and those of the opposing party are on the whole indulgently regarded.” 6 Moore’s Federal Practice (2d ed. 1971) § 56.15 [8], at 2439-40; Singleton v. Stewart, 280 N.C. 460, 186 2d 400 (1972). The movant must show (1) that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, and (2) that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Rule 56(c); Kessing v.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Kessing v. National Mortgage CorporationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  3. Koontz v. City of Winston-SalemSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  4. Page v. SloanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  5. Singleton v. StewartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972

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

3Cited by231 opinions

  1. Forbis v. NealSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2007
  2. Dickens v. PuryearSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  3. Johnson v. Phoenix Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  4. Dobson v. HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2000
  5. Boudreau v. BaughmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988

226 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