Legal Opinion

Parker v. Duke University

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 28, 1949PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

The single imputed error “in the signing of the judgment,” presents only the question whether error appears on the face of the record. Query v. Ins. Co., 218 N.C. 386, 11 S.E. 2d 139; Wilson v. Charlotte, 206 N.C. 856, 175 S.E. 306; Smith v. Smith, 223 N.C. 433, 27 S.E. 2d 137; King v. Rudd, 226 N.C. 156, 37 S.E. 2d 116; Rader v. Coach Co., 225 N.C. 537, 35 S.E. 2d 609.

We are not prepared to say that such has been revealed or made manifest. Nor is it according to precedent to chart the course of the trial on close or attenuate motions to strike portions of the pleadings. Pemberton v.…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Rader v. Queen City Coach Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  2. Scott v. . BryanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  3. Wilson v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  4. Pemberton v. City of GreensboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  5. Query v. Gate City Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Culbreth v. Britt Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  2. Wright's Clothing Store, Inc. v. Ellis Stone & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  3. Halifax Paper Co. v. Roanoke Rapids Sanitary DistrictSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  4. Reliable Trucking Co. v. PayneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  5. Carolina Power & Light Co. v. BowmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949

5 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