Legal Opinion

Riddle v. Artis

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 25, 1957No. 162PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBobbitt, J.

Artis, an original defendant, and McMillan, an additional defendant, are not parties to this appeal. The judgment recites that plaintiff had obtained a judgment by default and inquiry against defendants Artis and McMillan. We are concerned only with the sufficiency of the evidence to warrant submission to the jury of the issues arising on plaintiff’s alleged cause of action against defendants Morris.

“A demurrer to a complaint, G.S. 1-127, and a demurrer to the evidence, G.S. 1-183, are different in purpose and result. One challenges the sufficiency of the pleadings, the other the sufficiency…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Lane v. BryanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  2. Lewis v. ShaverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  3. Bost v. . MetcalfeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Lester v. RoseWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Maroulis v. ElliottSupreme Court of Virginia · 1966
  3. Glover v. Brotherhood of Railway & Steamship ClerksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  4. Roy Charles Rundle and Mrs. Evelyn Rundle v. Grubb Motor Lines, Inc., and Dwaine Murel MoserCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1962
  5. Gatlin v. ParsonsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962

4 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