Legal Opinion
Stokley v. Stokley
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
Decided August 4, 1976No. 751DC1023PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MARTIN, Judge.
The motion in the cause was made pursuant to Rule 60(b) (3), (4), and (6), Rules of Civil Procedure. The rule in pertinent part reads as follows:
“(b) Mistakes; inadvertence; excusable neglect; newly discovered evidence; fraud, etc. — On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or his legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons:(3) Fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party;’(4) The judgment is void;(6) Any other reason…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Pico v. CohnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Carpenter v. CarpenterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
- Horne v. . EdwardsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- Young v. . YoungSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
- Thrasher v. ThrasherCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Ivancovich v. MeierArizona Supreme Court · 1979
- Florida National Bank v. SatterfieldCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
- Smith v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1993
- Textile Fabricators, Inc. v. C. R. C. Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
- Caswell Realty Associates I, L.P. v. Andrews Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.