Legal Opinion

Patterson v. . Allen

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 25, 1938PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSeawell, J.

The defendant here insists that the plaintiff has sued for the conversion of certain lumber belonging to him and, defendant having interposed the plea of the statute of limitations, a payment to the plaintiff subsequent to the conversion would not have the effect of repelling the bar of the statute, since, as defendant contends, the action is in tort and not ex contractu.

It is well established, however, that “when a man’s property has been wrongfully converted, . . . the owner is allowed to waive the tort and sue on contract.” Sanders v. Ragan, 172 N. C., 612, 616; Stroud v. Ins. Co., 148 N.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sanders v. . RaganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  2. Stroud v. . Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  3. Cecil v. . HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
  4. Rooks v. . MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1852

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Variety Wholesalers, Inc. v. Salem Logistics Traffic Services, LLCCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011
  2. Kasparov, Pte Ltd. v. ZacherlDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2024
  3. SPECTRUM SOUTHEAST, LLC v. FOOTHILLS CABLE CONNECTIONS, INC.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API