Legal Opinion

Murillo v. Daly

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided March 15, 2005No. COA04-533PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WYNN, Judge.

In North Carolina, to establish when an action will be treated as a compulsory counterclaim, the similarity in the nature of the action and the remedy sought has been characterized as more important than a basis in a common factual transaction. Twin City Apartments, Inc. v. Landrum, 45 N.C. App. 490, 493, 263 S.E.2d 323, 325 (1980). In this case, Defendants argue that the trial court correctly treated Plaintiffs’ claims for breach of contract and negligence as compulsory counterclaims to a summary ejectment action. Because we hold that the nature of the actions asserted and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Summey v. BarkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2003
  2. Hales v. North Carolina Insurance Guaranty Ass'nSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1994
  3. Fickley v. Greystone Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
  4. Twin City Apartments, Inc. v. LandrumCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  5. Brooks v. RogersCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hendrix v. ADVANCED METAL CORP.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
  2. Mount Airy-Surry Cty. Airport Auth. v. AngelCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2019
  3. Town of Apex v. RubinCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2021
  4. Town of Apex v. RubinCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2021
  5. Townsend v. ShookCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011

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

Powered by the Exa API