Legal Opinion

Dixon v. Ipock

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 3, 1937PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDeviN, J.

An examination of the complaint would seem to justify defendants’ demurrer ore tenus interposed in the court below and in this *365Court, for it is nowhere alleged that at the time the notice of material-man’s claim was given defendants there was anything due the contractor. The remedies by statutory liens, authorized by sections 2437, 2438, 2440, and 2442 of the Consolidated Statutes, under which plaintiffs’ lien was filed and this action brought, are available only “before the owner shall have paid the contractor.” Rose v. Davis, 188 N. C., 355, 124 S. E., 576.

While upon the question whether at…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Rose v. . DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  2. Andrews-Cooper Lumber Co. v. HayworthSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Roberts & Johnson Lumber Co. v. HortonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  2. Parnell-Martin Supply Co. v. High Point Motor Lodge, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970

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

Powered by the Exa API