Legal Opinion

Franklin v. Standard Cellulose Products, Inc.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 15, 1964No. 468PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBobbitt, J.

Appellant contends “he is not a party against whom such an action may be prosecuted in the State of North Carolina and is not subject to service of process under G.S. 1-105” and therefore the action as to him should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. He cites G.S. 28-176 and Cannon v. Cannon, 228 N.C. 211, 45 S.E. 2d 34, as authority for the proposition that an action may not be prosecuted in this State against a foreign administrator.

G.S. 28-176 provides that “(a) 11 actions and proceedings brought by or against executors, administrators or collectors, upon any cause of action or right…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Dowling v. . WintersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
  2. Cannon v. . CannonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
  3. Brauff v. Commissioner of RevenueSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Tolson v. HodgeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1969
  2. Franklin v. Standard Cellulose Products, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  3. Troy L. Tolson v. Melba Joyce Hodge, Administratrix of the Estate of Arthur Eugene Hodge, Troy L. Tolson v. Melba Joyce Hodge, Administratrix of the Estate of Arthur Eugene HodgeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API