Legal Opinion

Jordan v. Hartness

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 12, 1949PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBaeNhill, J.

The plaintiff does not allege a loss peculiar to himself. Bane v. Powell, 192 N.C. 387, 135 S.E. 118. The alleged wrong caused loss to stockholders and creditors generally. Douglass v. Dawson, 190 N.C. 458. Thus he has failed to allege a cause of action resting in him which he may enforce of his own right. Bane v. Powell, supra.

A cause of action for the conversion or dissipation of corporate assets rests in the corporation and must be enforced by the corporation. Ordinarily, in the absence of demand upon the corporation to prosecute the action and its wrongful refusal so to do, the action may…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Hawes v. OaklandSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
  2. Taylor v. HolmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  3. Douglass v. DawsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  4. Murphy v. City of GreensboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  5. Corp. Commission v. Merchants BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Barger v. McCoy Hillard & ParksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1997
  2. Howell v. FisherCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  3. Loy v. Lorm Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  4. Fulton v. TalbertSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  5. Baker v. Data Dynamics, Inc.District Court, W.D. North Carolina · 1983

11 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