Legal Opinion

Sorrell v. Moore

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 29, 1960No. 522PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRodman, J.

The motion to strike is based on the assertion that the portions objected to are mere conclusions and not statements of facts; that the first quoted1 portion is insufficient to constitute a de- . fense or a cause of action, and that the last two are mere conclusions “totally incapable of proof under the facts as alleged! in the complaint.”

Th.e function of a pleading is to inform an adversary what facts are claimed to constitute the cause of action, G.S. 1-122, or defense, G.S. 1-135. If the complaint or answer gives notice of- the facts asserted for the cause of action or defense, it has…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. O'Brien v. WoldsonWashington Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Bogen v. . BogenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  3. Harper v. . Harper and Wickham v. . HarperSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  4. Bogen v. BogenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  5. Harper v. HarperSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Etheridge v. NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANYCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970
  2. Bigelow v. JohnsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  3. Strickland Ex Rel. Steed v. HughesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1968

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

Powered by the Exa API