Legal Opinion

Smith v. Smith

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 18, 1959No. 172PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMooRe, J.

Before reaching the main question involved, it is thought advisable to dispose of two preliminary matters.

1. The plaintiff did not file a reply and did not plead as an estoppel the admission of the defendant John B. Smith in his answer in a former suit for alimony, that he and plaintiff owned the locus in quo as tenants by the entireties.

“An estoppel is new matter and must generally be pleaded as a defense, and no advantage can be taken of it under a general denial; and this applies to estoppels by record or judgment, estoppels by deed, and estoppels in pais, or equitable estoppels. ‘An…

2Cases cited46 opinions

  1. Davis v. . BassSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  2. Harrison v. . RaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  3. City of Goldsboro v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  4. Jefferson Standard Life Insurance v. MoreheadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  5. Exum v. LynchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924

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

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. Huss v. HussCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976
  2. Setzer v. OLD REPUBLIC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  3. Yates v. BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
  4. Witzel v. WitzelWyoming Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Brice v. MooreCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976

38 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