Legal Opinion

Cathey v. Southeastern Construction Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 27, 1940PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClakksoN, J.

N. 0. Code, 1939 (Micbie), sec. 511, is as follows: “The defendant may demur to the complaint when it appears upon the face thereof, either that: . . . (6) The complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.”

In Leonard v. Maxwell, Comr., 216 N. C., 89 (91), the well settled rule is: “The office of a demurrer is to test the sufficiency of a pleading, admitting, for the purpose, the truth of factual averments well stated and such relevant inferences as may be deduced therefrom, but it does not admit any legal inferences or conclusions of law asserted by the pleader,”…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Hough v. Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1880
  2. Marks v. Cotton Mills.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
  3. Cotton v. North Carolina R. R. Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  4. Campbell v. . BoydSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1883
  5. Leonard v. . Maxwell, Comr. of RevenueSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Greenleaf v. Puget Sound Bridge & Dredging Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Bailey v. McGillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  3. Petty v. Cranston Print Works CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  4. Zocco v. United States, Department of the ArmyDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1992
  5. Tipton v. BargeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1957

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