Legal Opinion

Morrow v. . Cline

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 24, 1937PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClaeesoN, J.

The first question presented by defendants: “In an action for damages, where it is alleged a dead body has been mutilated, must the action be brought by the widow of deceased or by the minor children ?”

The defendants demurred to the complaint of plaintiffs, so on this record it is not necessary to answer this question. The sole question on this record: Are the allegations in the complaint sufficient to sustain the action? ¥e think so.

In Stephenson v. Duke University, 202 N. C., 624 (625), is the following: “This action was brought to recover damages for the mutilation or autopsy of the dead…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. The Phoenix Bank v. . DonnellNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
  2. Kyles v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  3. Ideal Brick Co. v. GentrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  4. Justice v. . SherardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
  5. Floyd v. Atlantnc Coast Line Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1914

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Lamm v. ShingletonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  2. McDowell v. Blythe Bros. Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  3. Dunahoo v. BessSupreme Court of Florida · 1941
  4. Infield v. CopeNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Casualty Co. v. . LawingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943

2 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