Legal Opinion

Allen v. Seay

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 30, 1958No. 525PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHiggins, J.

The plaintiff based her cause of action on a special contract. However, upon failure to establish the special contract her complaint contained sufficient allegations to permit her to go to the jury on quantum meruit. Thormer v. Mail Order Co., 241 N.C. 249, 85 S.E. 2d 140; Jamerson v. Logan, 228 N.C. 540, 46 S.E. 2d 561; Wright v. Ins. Co., 138 N.C. 488, 51 S.E. 55; Stokes v. Taylor, 104 N.C. 394, 10 S.E. 566.

The court submitted only the issue based on the value of the services, evidently upon the ground the evidence was insufficient to show the special contract. On this issue the judge…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Stokes v. . TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
  2. Winkler v. Killian.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  3. Coley v. . DalrympleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  4. Jamerson v. . LoganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  5. Francis v. . FrancisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  2. Carolina Helicopter Corp. v. Cutter Realty Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  3. Overton v. OvertonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  4. Wright v. WrightSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  5. Scott v. United Carolina BankCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998

9 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