Legal Opinion

Bowling v. Fidelity Bank

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 26, 1936PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClarkson, J.

The first question involved: Was his Honor below correct in sustaining the defendant’s demurrer ore ienus to the complaint upon the ground that said complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action? We think not.

We think that the complaint alleges a contract made by defendant with plaintiff and a breach, in reference to refinancing the lien held by defendant on the 22.95 acres of land owned by plaintiff. The contract also sets forth other conditions. The plaintiff alleges that “he has always been ready and willing to carry out the refinancing agreement then and there…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Blackmore v. . WindersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
  2. Stokes v. . TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
  3. Conley v. Richmond & Danville RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  4. Allen v. Carolina Central Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
  5. Buie v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. McDowell v. Blythe Bros. Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  2. Leach v. . PageSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  3. Davis v. RhodesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  4. Brown v. . HallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  5. Hill v. . StansburySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942

6 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