Legal Opinion

Lindsey v. . Mitchell

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 31, 1917PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Civil ACTION, tried before Kerr, J., and a jury, at May Term, 1917, pf AlAMANCE. Yerdict and judgment for plaintiff, and defendants Mitchell & McCauley appealed.

1Opinion of the CourtHoke, J.

Plaintiff alleged in his complaint, and on the trial offered evidence, tending to show that defendants, Mitchell & McCauley, were contractors, who had constructed a public graded-school building for the city of Burlington; that plaintiff had supplied building material which •had been used in'said building, an itemized statement of the amount being filed and exhibited, and there was a balance due plaintiff thereon of $1,211.88; that on notice, duly filed, the city of Burlington had retained from sum due contractors an amount sufficient to pay plaintiff’s claim, and same was ready and available…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Railway Co. v. McCarthySupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. Dows v. National Exchange Bank of MilwaukeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
  3. Ammons v. Wysong & Miles Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  4. Manufacturing Co. v. . TierneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
  5. Noftsger v. BarkdollIndiana Supreme Court · 1897

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Shipp Ex Rel. Shipp v. United Stage Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  2. Walker v. . BurtSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  3. Kannan v. . AssadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  4. Leggett v. Southeastern People's College, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  5. King v. Norfolk-Southern RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918

4 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