Legal Opinion

Sisk v. Perkins

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 17, 1965No. 199PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDenNY, C.J.

The appellant herein assigns as error the ruling of the court below that the judgment heretofore entered in the action between Lee Augustus Perkins and David William Sisk is not res judi-cata in the instant case as between the original defendant and the additional defendant, as shown by the amendment to the answer of defendant Lee Augustus Perkins. “* * * (W)here A sues B alone as tort feasor, and B impleads C on cross-claim allegations of negligence for contribution or indemnification, a resulting judgment in respect of the cross-claim will operate as an estoppel in a subsequent action…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Tarkington v. Printing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  2. Allen v. . SalleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
  3. Stansel v. McIntyreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  4. Calaway v. . HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  5. Bullard v. Berry Coal & Oil CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Alford v. ShawSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
  2. Miraglia v. MiragliaNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1969
  3. Johnson v. PetreeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969
  4. Abraham Ex Rel. Abraham v. SederstromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
  5. Blanton v. McLawhornCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969

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

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

Powered by the Exa API