Legal Opinion

Stanback v. Stanback

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 17, 1979No. 94PublishedCited by 400 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BROCK, Justice.

The motion to dismiss under N.C. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint. Sutton v. Duke, 277 N.C. 94, 176 S.E. 2d 161 (1970). In ruling on the motion the allegations of the complaint must be viewed as admitted, and on that basis the court must determine as a matter of law whether the allegations state a claim for which relief may be granted. Newton v. Standard Fire Ins. Co., 291 N.C. 105, 229 S.E. 2d 297 (1976). The motion performs substantially the same function as the old common law demurrer, Sutton v. Duke, supra, and in applying the rule we look to…

2Cases cited70 opinions

  1. Sutton v. DukeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  2. Kessing v. National Mortgage CorporationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  3. Crisci v. Security InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Newton v. Standard Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  5. Oestreicher v. American National Stores, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1976

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

3Cited by400 opinions

  1. Dickens v. PuryearSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  2. Harris v. NCNB National Bank of North CarolinaCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
  3. Johnson v. Ruark Obstetrics & Gynecology Associates, P.A.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
  4. Hogan v. Forsyth Country Club Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
  5. Burgess v. Your House of Raleigh, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1990

395 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