Legal Opinion

Merrell v. Stuart

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 19, 1941PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

"WiNBORNE, J.

That tbe complaint is subject to successful attack by demurrer, we are in accord with tbe court below.

At tbe outset it is appropriate to note tbat tbe common law offenses of champerty and maintenance bave been considered and condemned in tbis State, notably in these cases: Martin v. Amos (1851), 35 N. C., 201; Barnes v. Strong, 54 N. C., 100; Munday v. Whissenhunt, 90 N. C., 458. Compare Smith v. Hartsell, 150 N. C., 71, 63 S. E., 172.

A review of these cases is deemed pertinent.

In Martin v. Amos, supra, tbe Court held tbat a bond executed by defendants for payment of $200 to…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Ballinger v. . ThomasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  2. Insurance Co. v. . McCrawSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  3. Holland v. SheehanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
  4. Smith v. . HartsellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  5. Toler v. . FrenchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Kessing v. National Mortgage CorporationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  2. DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. KirkhartCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  3. Mallard v. . Housing AuthoritySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  4. Smith v. . SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  5. Smith v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945

8 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