Colon v. Bailey
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
*493HEDRICK, Chief Judge.
Plaintiffs and Insurance Company contend the court erred in granting summary judgment for defendants. G.S. 1A-1, Rule 56(c) permits summary judgment if no genuine issue exists as to any material fact and a party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Plaintiffs and Insurance Company argue that a genuine issue of fact has been raised as to whether the agreement was executed for the purpose of releasing all claims or merely those relating to the U.S.F. & G. proceeds. They contend that this issue is raised in plaintiffs’ answer to defendants’ interrogatory, which states…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Bernick v. JurdenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
- Strickland Ex Rel. Steed v. HughesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
- Robbins v. C. W. Myers Trading Post, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
- Cowart v. HoneycuttSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- Hoots v. CalawaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Cone Mills Corp. v. Allstate InsuranceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
- Computer Sales International, Inc. v. Forsyth Memorial Hospital, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993
- Broussard v. Meineke Discount Muffler Shops, Inc.District Court, W.D. North Carolina · 1997
- David Wichnoski, O.D., P.A. v. Piedmont Fire Prot. Sys.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
- Colon v. BaileyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985