Legal Opinion

EAC Credit Corporation v. Wilson

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided October 20, 1971No. 7120SC535PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAUGHN, Judge.

On the first occasion that the question was presented for review, the Supreme Court of North Carolina held that provisions calling for a debtor to pay attorney’s fees incurred by a creditor in the collection of a debt were contrary to public policy and, therefore, unenforceable. Tinsley v. Hopkins, 111 N.C. 340, 16 S.E. 325. The prohibition against the enforcement of such provisions in negotiable instruments was subsequently made statutory. C.S. 2983, G.S. 25-8. Effective as of 1 July *4831967, Chapter 25 of the General Statutes was repealed by Chapter 700 of the Session Laws of…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Rouse v. Wooten.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  2. Beebe v. KirkpatrickIllinois Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Wachovia Bank & Trust Co. v. CliftonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
  4. Cowan v. RobertsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
  5. Tinsley v. . HoskinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Stillwell Enterprises, Inc. v. Interstate Equipment Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  2. Shirley v. VenagliaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Yeargin Construction Co. v. Futren Development Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976
  4. Emerald Portfolio, LLC v. Outer Banks/Kinnakeet Assocs., LLCCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
  5. R.B. Cronland Building Supplies, Inc. v. SneedCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004

5 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