Legal Opinion

Neely v. . Minus

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 12, 1928PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBeogdeN, J.

"When is a summons returnable under the provisions of chapter 66, Public Laws 1927, or section 476 of the North Carolina Code of 1927?

The act of 1927 made material changes in the law theretofore existing. Formerly a summons was returnable before the clerk “at a date named therein not less than ten nor more than twenty days from its issuance.” The act now in force provides that a summons must be returnable before the clerk and must notify the defendant to appear and answer the complaint within thirty days after service thereof. It is further provided, however, that the sheriff to whom the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hatch v. Alamance Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  2. Bennett v. North Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
  3. Hatch v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  4. McGuire v. Montvale Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  5. Hanie v. . PenlandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Tieffenbrun v. . FlannerySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  2. Tieffenbrun v. FlannerySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  3. Webb v. EgglestonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  4. Mintz v. . FrinkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  5. Webb v. . EgglestonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948

13 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