Wiles v. Welparnel Const. Co., Inc.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
COPELAND, Justice.
The principal question presented by this appeal is whether service of a summons directed to a person described as the agent of a corporation, when the corporation is named in the complaint and the caption of the summons as the defendant, is sufficient service of process on the corporation. For the reasons set out below, we have determined that it is; therefore, the decision of the Court of Appeals must be reversed.
The long-standing rule in this state has been that when a summons directs service on a person as an agent or officer of a defendant corporation and is served on…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- State v. BallanceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
- State v. . BallanceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
- United States v. A. H. Fischer Lumber Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1947
- Bulova Watch Co. v. Brand Distributors of North Wilkesboro, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
- Plemmons v. Southern Improvement Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- Harris v. MareadySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
- Tyson v. L'Eggs Products, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- Granville Medical Center v. TiptonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
- Roshelli v. SperryCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
- Fender v. DeatonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.