Legal Opinion

Nello L. Teer Co. v. Hitchcock Corp.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 11, 1952No. 745PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDeNNy, J.

Tbe question for determination is whether, upon the facts as disclosed by the present record, the defendant was entitled, as a matter of law, to have the action removed to Buncombe County for trial. The answer must be in the affirmative.

G.S. 1-83 reads as follows: “If the county designated for that purpose in the summons and complaint is not the proper one, the action may, however, be tried therein, unless the defendant, before the time of answering expires, demands in writing that the trial be conducted in the proper county, and the place of trial is thereupon changed by consent of parties,…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co. v. Federal Power CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Industrial Addition Assn. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  3. Clark v. . HomesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  4. Rector v. . RectorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
  5. Jones v. Town of StatesvilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Thompson v. HorrellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  2. Swift and Company v. Dan-Cleve Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975
  3. Hawley v. HobgoodCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
  4. Mitchell v. JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  5. Stern v. CinomanCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2012

18 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