Legal Opinion

Sexton v. . Farrington

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 25, 1923PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAdaMS, J.

The defense relied on may be reduced to two propositions: (1) The plaintiff’s action is prosecuted to obtain relief on the ground of fraud and is barred by the three-year statute of limitations; (2) while the first summons was issued within three years from the time .the cause of action accrued the second was issued after the expiration of this period and when the second suit was brought the cost incurred in the first bad not been paid.

In consideration of the contentions with respect to the first proposition it becomes necessary to examine the complaint for the purpose of ascertaining the…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Avery v. StewartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
  2. Blackmore v. . WindersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
  3. Rankin v. OatesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  4. Lefkowitz v. . SilverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  5. Gorrell v. AlspaughSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Teachey v. . GurleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  2. Yarborough v. North Carolina Park CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  3. Reynolds v. Whitin MacH. WorksCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1948
  4. Pridgen v. . PridgenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  5. New Amsterdam Casualty Company, and Cross-Appellant v. Gladys N. Waller, and Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1962

13 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