Legal Opinion

Roland v. W & L Motor Lines, Inc.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 2, 1977No. 7629DC626PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MARTIN, Judge.

The defendant’s principal contention on appeal is that the 11 July letter should be treated as an answer. Defendant argues that, in writing this letter to the plaintiff’s attorney, its vice-president was doing exactly what the civil summons had instructed. In addition, the defendant argues that the letter satisfies all the requirements for an answer in that it puts plaintiff on notice as to what defense would be asserted; that it sets up a defense in bar to plaintiff’s claim; that it is responsive to the plaintiff’s allegations; that it refers to the complaint and the file…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Sophie Radack and Charles Radack v. Norwegian America Line Agency, Inc., and Den Norske Amerikalinje, A/sCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
  2. Dalminter, Inc. v. Jessie Edwards, Inc.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1961
  3. Simms v. MASON'S STORES, INC.(NC-1)Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  4. Port-Wide Container Co. v. Interstate Maintenance Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1971
  5. Spartan Leasing, Incorporated v. BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Lexis-Nexis v. Travishan Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  2. Reicheinbach v. Southeast Bank, NADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
  3. Gelkop v. GelkopDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
  4. Peebles v. MooreCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  5. City of Lemmon v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1980

23 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