Deitz v. Jackson
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
HEDRICK, Judge.
“A complaint is deemed sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) where no insurmountable bar to recovery appears on the face of the complaint and the complaint’s allegations give adequate notice of the nature and extent of the claim.” Presnell v. Pell, 298 N.C. 715, 719, 260 S.E. 2d 611, 613 (1979). “A claim for relief should not suffer dismissal unless it affirmatively appears that plaintiff is entitled to no relief under any state of facts which could be presented in support of the claim.” Presnell v. Pell, supra at 719, 260 S.E. 2d at 613.
With respect…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Sutton v. DukeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
- Page v. SloanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- Presnell v. PellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- Orange County v. Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
- Hendricks v. Leslie Fay, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- White v. Consolidated Planning, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004
- Johnson v. BollingerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- Johnson v. BollingerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- Dixon v. StuartCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- Saiz Ex Rel. Estate of Saiz v. Belen School DistrictNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1992
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.