Legal Opinion

Wooten v. . Walters

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 5, 1892PublishedCited by 56 opinions

Civil action, tried at November Term, 1891, of Lenoir Superior Court, Boykin, J., presiding. plaintiff’s appeal. The plaintiff brought this action to avoid the contract and recover the real and personal property hereinafter specified. The case was, by consent of the parties, referred.

Read the full summary

Civil action, tried at November Term, 1891, of Lenoir Superior Court, Boykin, J., presiding. plaintiff’s appeal. The plaintiff brought this action to avoid the contract and recover the real and personal property hereinafter specified. The case was, by consent of the parties, referred. The material facts found by the referee are as follows : 1. That in the year 1889 the plaintiff and defendants formed themselves into a company and were incorporated under the name of the Kinston Oil Mill Company, for the purpose of manufacturing cotton-seed oil. 3. That no certificates or other evidence of…

1Opinion of the Court

PLAINTIFF'S APPEAL.

The plaintiff brought this action to avoid the contract and recover the real and personal property hereinafter specified. The case was, by consent of the parties, referred.

The material facts found by the referee are as follows:

1. That in 1889 the plaintiff and defendants formed themselves into a company and were incorporated under the name of the Kinston Oil Mill Company, for the purpose of manufacturing cotton-seed oil.

3. That no certificates or other evidence of stock were ever issued by said company.

4. In November, 1889, the plaintiff agreed with the defendant J. D.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Chamblee v. . BakerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
  2. Jarrett v. . SelfSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
  3. Lawing v. . RintlesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
  4. Dula v. . CowlesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1859
  5. Niblett v. . HerringSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1857

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

3Cited by56 opinions

  1. Christenbury Eye Ctr., P.A. v. Medflow, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2017
  2. Hudson v. WylieCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1957
  3. Sterling v. GregoryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Fullam v. Wright & Colton Wire Cloth Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  5. Bank of Antigo v. Union Trust Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1894

51 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