Legal Opinion

City of Raleigh v. Mercer

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided July 24, 1967No. 534PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtParker, C.J.

The city of Raleigh’s motion to dismiss the proceeding because the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action is in effect a demurrer, Johnson v. Graye, 251 N.C. 448, 111 S.E. 2d 595, and a demurrer presents squarely for decision the sufficiency of the pleadings, because the motion in this case for the purpose admits the truth of factual averments well stated in the statement of the case on appeal, and all relevant inferences as may be reasonably deduced therefrom. But it does not admit conclusions of law. 3 Strong’s N. C. Index, Pleadings, § 12.

It appears that…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Erickson v. StarlingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  2. City of Raleigh v. PeaceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
  3. Felmet v. Town of CantonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
  4. Johnson v. GrayeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  5. Town of Tarboro v. StatonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Long v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  2. E-470 Public Highway Authority v. 455 Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2000
  3. Simmons v. City of MoscowIdaho Supreme Court · 1986
  4. In re the Special Assessment of $32,218.23 Against Property on Stadium DriveCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  5. Southern Railway Co. v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971

1 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