Legal Opinion

Rucker v. . Snider Brothers, Inc.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 28, 1937PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

This is the same case that was before us, on petition to remove, at the Fall Term, 1936, reported in 210 N. C., 778.

The ruling on the motion to strike will be upheld on authority of Pemberton v. Greensboro, 203 N. C., 514, 166 S. E., 396; S. c., 205 N. C., 599, 172 S. E., 196. Nothing was said in Poovey v. Hickory, 210 N. C., 630, 188 S. E., 78, or Jackson v. Bank, 203 N. C., 357, 166 S. E., 176, which conflicts with this view.

On the argument, appellant interposed a demurrer ore tenus to the complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Pemberton v. City of GreensboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
  2. Pemberton v. City of GreensboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  3. Poovey v. City of HickorySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  4. Rucker v. . Snider Brothers, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  5. Jackson v. . BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Guthrie v. . GockingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  2. Hill v. . StansburySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  3. In Re Disabarment of WestSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  4. Cunningham Ex Rel. Cunningham v. HaynesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API