Legal Opinion

Wise v. Vincent

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 24, 1965No. 357PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.

The first question raised is whether original defendant Vincent states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action for contribution against additional defendant Jones.

The applicable rules of law are stated in Hayes v. Wilmington, 243 N.C. 525, 91 S.E. 2d 673, as follows:

“1. Liability for contribution under the provisions of G.S. 1-240 may not be invoked except among joint tortfeasors. Therefore, in order for one defendant to join another as a third-party defendant for the purpose of contribution, he must allege facts sufficient to show joint tortfeasorship and his right to contribution…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Hayes v. City of WilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  2. Hunsucker v. High Point Bending & Chair Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  3. Freeman v. . ThompsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  4. Clark v. ScheldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  5. Dunlap v. LeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Slade Ex Rel. Slade v. New Hanover County Board of EducationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1971
  2. Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996
  3. Murphy v. Edwards and WarrenCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
  4. Iowa National Mutual Insurance v. SurrattCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1973
  5. Martin v. SmithDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API