Nance v. . Hulin
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.
Tbe liability of tbe defendants was that of endorsers' and as against them tbe plaintiff’s cause of action was barred by tbe three-year statute of limitations. C. S., 441, 3044; Houser v. Fayssoux, 168 N. C., 1; Bank v. Wilson, ibid., 557; Dillard v. Mercantile Co., 190 N. C., 225. Tbe statute of limitations began to run at tbe maturity of tbe note — 1 November, 1922. Triplett v. Foster, 115 N. C., 335. Tbe action was brought on 16 December, 1925, and is barred unless tbe alleged payments arrested tbe running of tbe statute. Tbe trial judge instructed tbe jury that if tbe two payments were…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Houser v. . FayssouxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Battle v. . BattleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1895
- Cashmar-King Supply Co. v. Dowd & KingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
- Dillard v. Farmers Mercantile Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- Hewlett v. . SchenckSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1880
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Bryant v. . KellumSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
- Lester Piano Co. v. LovenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
- Coburn v. . BarnhillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
- Nance v. . HulinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
- Howard v. . WhiteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.