Legal Opinion

Bank v. . King

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 10, 1913PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CLARK, C. J., dissents; HOKE, J., concurs in dissent. Civil action, tried upon these issues:

1. Did the defendants execute the note, as alleged, and make the payments down to April, 1907, as alleged? Answer: Yes.

2. Did the plaintiff sell the stock for $1,500, and apply the proceeds thereof on the note, as alleged in the pleadings, on 25 February, 1913? Answer: Yes.

3. Is the plaintiff's cause of action barred by the statute of limitations? Answer: No.

4. Are the defendants indebted to the plaintiffs, as alleged; if so, in what sum? Answer: $1,036.36, with interest on $1,005.58 from 2 May, 1913.

Th…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. United States v. LorinceDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1991
  2. Hoffman v. SheahinCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
  3. Zaks v. ElliottCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1939
  4. Coburn v. . BarnhillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  5. Krupnick v. Peoples State BankDistrict Court, E.D. South Carolina · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API