J. B. Colt Co. v. Kimball
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtYaeseR, J.
Upon tbe defendant’s pleading, it is apparent that fraud has not been sufficiently pleaded. It is accepted in this jurisdiction that the facts relied upon to constitute fraud, as well as the fraudulent intent, must be clearly alleged. Bank v. Seagroves, 166 N. C., 608; Beaman v. Ward, 132 N. C., 68, 71; Anderson v. Rainey, 100 N. C., 321, 334; McLean v. Manning, 60 N. C., 608; Machine Co. v. Feezer, 152 N. C., 516; Merrimon v. Paving Co., 142 N. C., 540. Fraud must be charged positively, and not by implication. Foy v. Stephens, 168 N. C., 438. The presumption is always in favor of .the…
2Cases cited71 opinions
- Michael v. . FoilSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888
- Moffitt v. . ManessSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
- Floars v. Ætna Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
- Bunch v. Elizabeth City Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
- Griffin v. Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
66 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Vail v. VailSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- H. H. King Flour Mills Co. v. Bay City Baking Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1927
- Industrial Loan & Investment Bank v. DardineSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
- Plotkin v. Realty Bond Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
- Litvak v. SmithCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2006
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.