Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Cheek v. . R. R.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided September 28, 1938PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBarnhill, J.
This action was brought by Amanda Cheek, administratrix of the estate of J. H. Cheek, deceased, to recover for the injury and death of her intestate, which she alleges was caused by the negligence of the defendants.
Defendants denied the material allegations of the complaint and pleaded a release executed by the deceased a short time after this injury; and the plaintiff replied, pleading mistake and fraud in procurement of the release.
The defendants pleaded that the matters in controversy had become resadjudicata, both as to the release and as to the merits of the case, because of a former…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Great Northern Ry. Co. v. FowlerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1905
- Seymour v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1917
- Bean v. Western North Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- West v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
- White v. Richmond & Danville RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Creech v. MelnikSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1998
- Marriott Financial Services, Inc. v. Capitol Funds, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
- Cunningham v. BrownCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
- Caudill v. CHATHAM MANUFACTURING COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- Durant v. . PowellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.