Hood Ex Rel. Bank of Pender v. Paddison
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtClasksoN, J.
The question involved: May tbe defendant, alleged owner of capital stock in a defunct State bank, in an action by tbe Commissioner of Banks to recover of the defendant the amount of his statutory liability as such stockholder, avail himself of tbe defense that he was induced to purchase said stock by the false and fraudulent representations of the condition of the bank by its president? We think, under the facts and circumstances of this case, that there was sufficient competent facts alleged by defendant on the record, to be submitted to the jury on the question involved.
The defendant, as a…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Early v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Warren v. Littleton Orange Crush Bottling Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
- Chamberlain v. . TrogdenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
- In Re Goldsboro Savings & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
- Hood v. MartinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
3Cited by5 opinions
- Fulton v. VickeryCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
- Hood Ex Rel. North Carolina Bank & Trust Co. v. North Carolina Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Hood Ex Rel. North Carolina Bank & Trust Co. v. North Carolina Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Hood Ex Rel. North Carolina Bank & Trust Co. v. North Carolina Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Hood Ex Rel. North Carolina Bank & Trust Co. v. North Carolina Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1936