Legal Opinion

Dillingham v. . Gardner

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 30, 1942PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchenck, J.

It is admitted by the parties and found as a fact by the court that the only transaction ever had between the plaintiff and defendant was regarding two notes; that these two notes were involved in the case of “Scott Dillingham, sole trustee of the Southern Finance & Bonding Company, v. L. H. Gardner et al.,” opinion in which appears in 219 N. C., at page 227, 13 S. E. (2d), 478, in which opinion judgment in the General County Court of Buncombe County, affirmed in the Superior Court of Buncombe County, was affirmed by this Court, in which it was found as a fact that the defendant, L. H.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Dillingham v. . GardnerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  2. Hendrix v. Harry's Cadillac Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1941

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Crosland-Cullen Company v. CroslandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
  2. Long v. . TranthamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  3. Griffin v. McBrayerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  4. Bauman v. Pasquotank Cty. ABC Bd.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2020
  5. Bauman v. Pasquotank Cty. ABC Bd.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API