Legal Opinion

Tar Heel Bond Co. v. Krider

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 30, 1940PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarNhill, J.

The plaintiff herein, seeks to present three questions: (1) Was it error for the court to enter judgment absolute upon the bond before the service of sci. fa. upon the principal, James Nance? (2) Did the subsequent arrest of James Nance under the capias issued by the court discharge his bond upon which plaintiff was surety? (3) Was it error for the court below to hear and determine the application for an injunction on its merits while plaintiff’s motion, entered subsequent to the judgment absolute, was pending and before ruling on the merits of the motion?

Fi/rsi. A recognizance duly entered…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Rouse v. Wooten.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  2. Edwards v. Jefferson Standard Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
  3. Dry v. . ReynoldsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  4. Horton v. . WilsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
  5. Federal Land Bank of Columbia v. WhitehurstSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. In Re Revocation of License to Operate a Motor Vehicle of WrightSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  2. State v. VikreCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
  3. ARCADY FARMS MILLING COMPANY v. WallaceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  4. State v. DewSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  5. Perley v. Ballenger Paving Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1948

3 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