George v. . High
Supreme Court of North Carolina
•Omr, Action, beard on complaint and demurrer at Fall 'Term, 1880, of Columbus Superior Court, before Avery, J. The demurrer was sustained and the plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtRuhbtn, J.
The issue in this case is altogether one of 'law growing out of the demurrer of the defendant to the •complaint.
The complaint alleges that the plaintiff being the wife óf the defendant’s intestate, at several times advanced and lent to her husband divers sums of money, amounting in the ■aggregate to some $2,700, no part of which has been paid.
The defendant assigns as grounds for his demurrer l
1. That as it appears on the face of the complaint, the plaintiff was the wife of the defendant’s intestate, at the time the alleged advancements were made, and it does not appear that the amounts…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Love v. Commissioners of Chatham CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1870
- Dula v. . YoungSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874
- Kirkman v. Bank of GreensboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1877
3Cited by18 opinions
- State v. StroudCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
- Battle v. MayoSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
- Osborne v. . WilkesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
- Woodruff v. . BowlesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
- Walker v. . LongSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.