Legal Opinion

Howell v. Fisher

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided November 18, 1980No. 8011SC340PublishedCited by 77 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAUGHN, Judge.

The issue is whether plaintiff-stockholders’ suit was properly dismissed under Rule 12(b)(7) for failure tojointhe corporation as a necessary party. Plaintiffs contend that the court committed error on two alternative bases: (1) that even if the corporation were a necessary party, the action should have been continued to permit joinder; (2) the corporation was not, however, a necessary party because the complaint was an individual claim for personal wrongs done to them by defendants. At the outset, we note that dismissal under Rule 12(b)(7) is proper only when the defect cannot…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Ultramares Corp. v. ToucheNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
  2. Glanzer v. . ShepardNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
  3. Snyder v. FreemanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  4. Davidson & Jones, Inc. v. County of New HanoverCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
  5. Sutter v. General Petroleum Corp.California Supreme Court · 1946

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

3Cited by77 opinions

  1. Barger v. McCoy Hillard & ParksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1997
  2. Raritan River Steel Co. v. Cherry, Bekaert & HollandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
  3. Norman v. Nash Johnson & Sons' Farms, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
  4. Energy Investors Fund, L.P. v. Metric Constructors, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2000
  5. Cook Consultants, Inc. v. Larson, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1985

72 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