Legal Opinion

Coble v. Brown

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 21, 1968No. 67SC16PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMorris, J.

Defendant assigns, as error the Court’s consideration of hearsay evidence contained in the. Coble and Strader affidavits; making certain findings of fact based on this incompetent evidence; and concluding as a matter of law that defendant was duly served with process under G.S. 1-105 and G.S. 1-105.1 and defendant had wholly complied with the provisions of said statutes. If there is competent evidence to support the Court’s findings of fact, we are, of course, bound by the findings. Bigham v. Foor, 201 N.C. 14, 158 S.E. 548 (1931).

G.S. 1-105 sets out the procedures to be followed in effecting…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Harrison v. HanveySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  2. Bigham v. . FoorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  3. Scott Co. v. Jones Hooker v. JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  4. Hart v. QUEEN CITY COACH COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  5. Brown v. DobySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Huggins v. Hallmark Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
  2. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. BrewerAppellate Court of Illinois · 2012
  3. Williams v. Town of GriftonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974
  4. Aarp v. Am. Family Prepaid Legal Corp.North Carolina Business Court · 2007
  5. Grohman v. JonesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1971

4 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