Orkin Exterminating Co. of Raleigh, Inc. v. Griffin
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Per curiam
Each defendant makes only one assignment of error. It raises the question whether the -court below erred in continuing the temporary restraining order until the final determination of the action on its merits.
The judge was not requested to find the facts upon which he continued the temporary restraining order and he made none. However, it is presumed for the purpose of his order that he found facts sufficient to support it. Hall v. Coach Co. et. al., 224 N.C. 781, 32 S.E. 2d 325; Edmonds v. Hall, 236 N.C. 153, 72 S.E. 2d 221; Strong, N.C. Index, Injunctions, Sec. 13.
The affidavits disclose…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Asheville Associates, Inc. v. MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
- Edmonds v. HallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
- Orkin Exterminating Co. v. WilsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
- Delmar Studios of the Carolinas, Inc. v. GoldstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
- Hall v. Queen City Coach Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
3Cited by23 opinions
- A.E.P. Industries, Inc. v. McClureSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- Manpower of Guilford County, Inc. v. HedgecockCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
- James C. Greene Company v. KelleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- Hejl v. Hood, Hargett & Associates, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
- Triangle Leasing Co. v. McMahonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.