Legal Opinion

WACHOVIA BANK & TRUST COMPANY v. Currin

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 9, 1956No. 460PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHiggins, J.

A motion to strike allegations from a pleading for irrelevancy admits, for the purposes of the motion, the truth of all facts well pleaded as well as all inferences which legitimately may be drawn from the facts alleged. The motion, however, does not admit conclusions of the pleader. Bank v. Bryan, 240 N.C. 610, 83 S.E. 2d 485; Dixie Lines v. Grannick, 238 N.C. 552, 78 S.E. 2d 410.

In the further defense, the defendant Currin alleged he arranged for the purchase of the truck from Northam Motor Company for $2,258.85; that he paid $712.21 in cash and arranged with the plaintiff for a loan of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Penn Dixie Lines, Inc. v. GrannickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  2. Batts v. . SullivanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  3. Crouse v. VernonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  4. Bank of French Broad, Inc. v. BryanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  5. Stuyvesant Insurance v. ReidSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. RH Bouligny, Inc. v. United Steelworkers of Amer.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  2. TROY LUMBER COMPANY v. HuntSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  3. Parnell v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  4. Lyon v. MayCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993
  5. Pack v. McCoySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960

2 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