Barnes v. Peoples Bank & Trust Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtAbams, J.
The plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings was in the nature of a demurrer to the answer, admitting the truth of the allegations therein, but denying their legal sufficiency to constitute a defense. For this reason the answer should be liberally construed and every intendment should be taken against the plaintiff; or, conversely, to warrant the judgment the allegations which are essential as a basis for it should be admitted. Pridgen v. Pridgen, 190 N. C., 102; Churchwell v. Trust Co., 181 N. C., 21; Alston v. Hill, 165 N. C., 255.
On 11 April, 1925, the defendant received from the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond v. MalloySupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Pridgen v. . PridgenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- Moye v. . CogdellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1873
- Malloy v. Federal Reserve Bank of RichmondDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1922
- Alston v. . HillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Erickson v. StarlingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
- Petty v. Pacific Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Oldham Ex Rel. Reynolds v. RossSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- Crutchfield v. . FosterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
- Litchfield v. . ReidSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.