Legal Opinion

Canestrino v. Powell

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 30, 1949PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtErvin, J.

This appeal presents this problem for solution: Does the cross-complaint of Staudt against the Railroad Company state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action? Since the sufficiency of the cross-complaint in this respect is challenged by the demurrer of the Railroad Company, it must appear, either expressly or by implication, that the facts necessary to entitle Staudt to the relief sought by him are set forth therein.

The Railroad Company was not an actor in the' events resulting in the injury to the plaintiff, and cannot be held liable to Staudt for contribution as a fellow joint…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Gorrell v. Greensboro Water Supply Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1899
  2. Charnock v. . TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  3. Freeman v. . ThompsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  4. Tarkington v. Printing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  5. Godfrey v. Tidewater Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1943

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. American Trust Co. v. Catawba Sales & Processing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  2. Smith v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  3. Yandell v. National Fireproofing Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  4. Lane v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  5. State Ex Rel. Cain v. CorbettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952

15 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