Legal Opinion

Dixon v. Osborne

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 5, 1933PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClarkson, J.

Tbe plaintiffs alleged in tbeir complaint three canses of action and set forth the questions involved on this appeal, which we abbreviate as follows: (1) Do bonds tainted with usury retain their taint in the hands of third parties? (2) Are the holders of bonds, secured by mortgage liable for not paying premium on fire-policy, when the mortgagors delivered them a sum of money accompanied by a list directing its application, which list contained an item for insurance premium which they thought the holders had paid as agreed, until the house burned six weeks later? (3) Are holders of bonds…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Ripple v. Mortgage & Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
  2. Joyner v. Futrell.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
  3. Ward v. . SuggSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
  4. Farmer v. . DanielSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1880
  5. Harrell v. Blythe.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Power Co. v. . Clay CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  2. Hill v. . LindsaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  3. Crouse v. VernonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  4. Bank of French Broad, Inc. v. BryanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  5. Ghormley v. . HyattSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935

8 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