Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Melton v. . Rickman

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 17, 1945PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDevin, J.

Civil action ex delicto for damages resulting from the abuse of criminal process, heard on motion to strike certain allegations in the complaint.

The motion first came on for hearing before the clerk who allowed the motion to strike certain paragraphs and denied it as to others. When the appeal came on to be heard in the court below "the plaintiff, through counsel, states in open Court that he elects to sue upon malicious abuse of process only." Thereupon the judge overruled the clerk and denied the motion to strike in toto. The defendant excepted and appealed.

The plaintiff alleges in…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Stanford v. . Grocery Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  2. Jackson v. Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  3. Railroad Co. v. Hardware Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  4. Carpenter, Baggott & Co. v. HanesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  5. Miller v. . GreenwoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Barnette v. WoodySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  2. Palmer Ford, Inc. v. WoodCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1984
  3. Fowle v. FowleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  4. McFadyen v. Duke UniversityDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2011
  5. Succession of Cutrer v. CurtisLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1977

24 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