Legal Opinion

Hinnant v. Hinnant

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 11, 1963PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtHiggins, J.

The defendant was personally served with summons in the original action instituted in 1953 in Robeson County. He and his counsel of record signed the consent judgment which, by its express terms, retained the cause on the docket. Thereafter service upon the attorney of record was sufficient. “The relation of the attorney of record to the action, nothing else appearing, continues so long as the opposing party has the right by statute or otherwise to enter a motion therein or to apply to the court for further relief.” Weddington v. Weddington, 243 N.C. 702, 92 S.E. 2d 71; Henderson v.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Henderson v. HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  2. Weddington v. WeddingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  3. Lambeth v. LambethSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  4. Porter v. CITIZENS BANK OF WARRENTON, INCORPORATEDSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  5. Walker v. . WalkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Bennett v. BennettCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API