Legal Opinion

CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY v. Funderburg

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 24, 1965No. 192PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRodmaN, J.

While the court states as a fact that feme defendant received no consideration binding her on the contract of indemnity, and for that reason is not liable, the question for determination is not a factual question, but one of law, viz: Do the undisputed facts establish a consideration imposing liability on feme defendant?

W. S. Funderburg, on April 27, 1960, contracted with the United States for the construction of a dike near Charleston. At the request of W. S. Funderburg, plaintiff (Continental) executed a bond guaranteeing performance of the contract and payment of labor and material used in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Storm v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. Brown v. . TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
  3. Farmers Co-Operative Fertilizer Co. v. EasonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Martin v. VanceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
  2. Carolina-Virginia Fashion Exhibitors, Inc. v. GunterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  3. In Re Claim of DuckettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  4. Collie v. Wehr Dissolution Corp.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2004
  5. Deal v. ChristenburyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981

2 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