Legal Opinion · Dissent

Western Auto Supply Co. v. Vick

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 5, 1981No. 11Published

1DissentJustice Meyer

I respectfully dissent from the majority for several reasons.

First, I find the majority’s reliance on prior North Carolina cases to be misplaced. It is true that prior decisions of this Court, such as Bynum v. Rogers, 49 N.C. 399 (1857), have said that if the purchaser of a note requires the endorsement of the seller as a guaranty of payment the transaction is, between the immediate parties, in effect, a loan. But Bynum and its companion cases involved settings far removed, both factually and temporally, from that found in the case at bar.

The controlling precedent so heavily relied on by the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bynum v. . RogersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1857
  2. Lake Hiwassee Development Co. v. Pioneer BankTennessee Supreme Court · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API