FT. RECOVERY INDUSTRIES, INC. v. Perry
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
CLARK, Judge.
Defendant argues that the court erred in granting summary judgment in that there existed genuine issues as to the reach of Ohio’s in personam jurisdiction and the nature of defendant’s appearance in that State. Pursuant to G.S. 1A-1, Rule 56, summary judgment will be granted when the moving party has shown that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Prather, Thomas, Campbell, Pridgeon, Inc. v. Properties, Inc., 29 N.C. App. 316, 224 S.E. 2d 289 (1976).
The judgment rendered by the Ohio court is a judgment in…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Durfee v. DukeSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Sherrer v. SherrerSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Frances Hosiery Mills, Inc. v. Burlington Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Ware v. WareSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2013
- Seal Polymer Industries-BHD v. Med-Express, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2012
- Steag Energy Services Gmbh v. EbingerNorth Carolina Business Court · 2012
- Lynch v. LynchCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989