Legal Opinion

Eller v. Arnold

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 11, 1949PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWiNBORNE, J.

The question here is this: Does the complaint state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against defendants Douglass and Bazakis, or either of them ? In the light of applicable principles of law in effect in this State, and considering as true the allegations of fact alleged in the complaint, we hold that the question must be answered in the negative.

It is noted at the outset that plaintiff does not allege that he had a contract with either defendant Douglass or defendant Bazakis. But it is alleged in effect that the defendants conspired to defraud plaintiff of his commissions,…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Turner v. . GlennSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  2. Eaton v. . DoubSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  3. Smith v. . FullerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
  4. Wood v. Tinsley.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  5. Winston v. Williams & McKeithan Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1947

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Childress v. AbelesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  2. Bourne v. LAY & COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  3. Hayes v. RicardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  4. New Bar Partnership v. MartinCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2012
  5. Carolina Overall Corp. v. East Carolina Linen Supply, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970

9 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